2011 FDIC

National Survey 

of Unbanked and 

Underbanked 

Households

Executive Summary

September 2012

Federal Deposit 

Insurance Corporation
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underaned Households  •

Members of the FDIC Unbanked/Underbanked Survey Study Group

Division of Depositor and Consumer Protection: Susan Burhouse, Sarah Campbell, Timothy Critchfield, Keith Ernst, 

Ryan Goodstein, Yazmin Osaki, Luke Reynolds, and Sherrie Rhine.

Division of Insurance and Research: David Chapman, Eric Robbins, and Katherine Samolyk.

Legal Division: Leneta Gregorie

Lead Authors

Susan Burhouse and Yazmin Osaki.

Lead Statistical Analysts and Advisors

Sarah Campbell, David Chapman, and Ryan Goodstein.

Contributors: 

Michael Bachman, Karyen Chu, Peggi Gill, Anirudh Sarna, Francis Solomon, David Spanburg, Masseh Tahiry, and 

Kathy Zeidler.
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underaned Households  •

I. Executive Summary

The FDIC is committed to ensuring that all Americans 

have access to safe, secure, and affordable banking 

services. Public confidence in the banking system derives 

in part from how effectively banks serve the needs of the 

nation’s diverse population. To assess the inclusiveness of 

the banking system, and in response to a statutory 

mandate, the FDIC conducts biennial surveys of households to estimate the proportion of households that do not 

fully participate in the banking system.1 This report presents the results of the 2011 FDIC National Survey of 

Unbanked and Underbanked Households.

The FDIC partnered with the US Census Bureau to 

conduct this survey in June 2011, collecting responses 

from nearly 45,000 households. The FDIC used survey 

responses to categorize households’ banking status as 

unbanked, underbanked, or fully banked. Unbanked 

households are those that lack any kind of deposit account 

at an insured depository institution. Underbanked households hold a bank account, but also rely on alternative 

financial services (AFS) providers.2

 Fully banked households are those that have a bank account of any kind and 

have not recently relied on any of the AFS included in 

the survey.3

Key Findings

More than one in four households (28.3 percent) are 

either unbanked or underbanked, conducting some or all 

of their financial transactions outside of the mainstream 

banking system. Many of these households rely on AFS 

1 Section 7 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Conforming Amendments Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109–173) calls for the FDIC to conduct ongoing 

surveys, “on efforts by insured depository institutions to bring those individuals and families who have rarely, if ever, held a checking account, a 

savings account or other type of transaction or check cashing account at 

an insured depository institution [‘unbanked’] into the conventional 

finance system.” Section 7 further instructs the FDIC to consider several 

factors when conducting the surveys, including estimating the size and 

worth of the unbanked market in the United States and identifying the 

primary issues that prevent unbanked individuals from establishing 

conventional accounts.

2 For the purposes of this report, households are identified as 

“unbanked” if they answered “no” to the question, “Do you or does 

anyone in your household currently have a checking or savings account?” 

Underbanked households are defined as those households that have a 

checking and/or a savings account and had used non-bank money orders, 

non-bank check cashing services, non-bank remittances, payday loans, 

rent-to-own services, pawn shops, or refund anticipation loans (RALs) in 

the past 12 months. 

3 Fully banked households may have used AFS more than a year ago or 

may currently use types of AFS not included in this survey. Based on the 

banking status classification used in this report, fully banked households 

are the most engaged in the financial mainstream. However, there are still 

opportunities to improve the quality and sustainability of banking relationships for some of the fully banked households (e.g., expanding the use of 

savings accounts or bank credit products). 

providers, while others use cash or other financial 

arrangements. 

• 8.2 percent of US households are unbanked. This 

represents 1 in 12 households in the nation, or 

nearly 10 million in total. Approximately 17 million 

adults live in unbanked households.4

• The proportion of unbanked households increased 

slightly since the first survey. The estimated 0.6 

percentage point increase represents an additional 

821,000 unbanked households.5 

• 20.1 percent of US households are underbanked. 

This represents one in five households, or 24 

million households with 51 million adults.6 The 

2011 underbanked rate in 2011 is higher than the 

2009 rate of 18.2 percent, although the proportions 

are not directly comparable because of differences 

in the two surveys.7

• 29.3 percent of households do not have a savings 

account, while about 10 percent do not have a 

checking account. About two-thirds of households 

have both checking and savings accounts. 

• One-quarter of households have used at least one 

AFS product in the last year, and almost one in ten 

households have used two or more types of AFS 

products. In all, 12 percent of households used AFS 

products in the last 30 days, including four in ten 

unbanked and underbanked households.

4 In addition, unbanked adults may also reside in other households. 

Adults are defined as persons aged 16 and older. This is a lower-bound 

estimate of the number of unbanked adults in the United States because it 

is based on the assumption that all adults residing in a “banked” household are banked. A banked household may contain one or more unbanked 

adults; these unbanked adults residing in banked households are not 

included in the 17.6 million adults number cited in this report.

5 All reported differences resulting from direct comparisons described in 

the text are statistically significant at the 10 percent level, unless otherwise noted.

6 This is an upper-bound estimate of the total number of underbanked 

adults in the United States because it is based on the assumption that all 

adults residing in an underbanked household are underbanked. However, 

an underbanked household may contain one or more adults who are not 

underbanked.

7 Revisions made to the 2011 survey instrument led to changes in the 

definition of an underbanked household. Specifically, the inclusion of 

questions regarding households’ use of non-bank remittances in 2011 and 

changes to the questions regarding the time frames during which households used AFS make it impossible to directly compare underbanked estimates across years. 
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underaned Households  •

Unbanked and Underbanked Households

Unbanked and underbanked households are not homogeneous populations. On the contrary, these groups have 

diverse demographic characteristics, past banking experiences, reasons for not holding an account, and future 

banking plans. 

The highest unbanked and underbanked rates are found 

among non-Asian minorities, lower-income households, 

younger households, and unemployed households.8 Close 

to half of all households in these groups are unbanked or 

underbanked compared to slightly more than one-quarter 

of all households. Relative to 2009, the estimated 

unbanked rates in 2011 are essentially unchanged for most 

groups.9

8 The demographic characteristics of a household, such as race, age, 

education, and employment, are taken to be those of the owner or renter 

of the home (i.e., “householder”), unless the characteristic is one defined 

at the household level, such as income or household type. For convenience, some abbreviated language will be used to refer to the demographic characteristics of households. For example, the term “black 

household” refers to a household for which the householder has been 

identified as black. Note that other members of a household could have 

different characteristics from those of the householder. For instance, an 

unemployed household is defined as a household whose householder is 

unemployed, but other household members could be employed and earning income. The income measures included in this report reflect the 

income earned by all household members and not only the householder. 

9 Reported differences between groups described in the text do not 

account for other geographic or demographic factors that may also 

contribute to the disparities.

Unbanked, 8.2

Underbanked, 

20.1

Fully Banked, 68.8

Banked, but 

Underbanked 

Status Unknown*, 

2.9

Figure 1.1 2011 Banking Status of US 

Households (Percent)

Notes: Percentages are based on 120.4 million US households. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding. 

* These households are banked, but there is not enough information to determine if they are underbanked. 

Unbanked, 8.2

Checking and 

Savings Accounts, 

67.2

Savings Account 

Only, 2.0

Checking Account 

Only, 21.1

Banked but 

Unknown Type, 1.5

Figure 1.2 2011 US Households by Account 

Type (Percent)

Notes: Percentages are based on 120.4 million US households. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding. 

Table 1.1 Banking Status for Select Demographic Groups

Select Demographic 

Groups

Percent 

Unbanked

Percent 

Underbanked

Percent 

Fully 

Banked

All households 8.2 20.1 68.8

Blacks 21.4 33.9 41.6

Foreign-born non-citizens 22.2 28.9 45.8

Households experiencing 

unemployment 22.5 28.0 47.5

Lower-income households (less 

than $15,000) 28.2 21.6 47.6

Unmarried female family 

households* 19.1 29.5 48.4

Hispanics 20.1 28.6 48.7

Households with householders 

under age 24 17.4 31.0 49.7

* The Census Bureau classifies households into different household types. For example, a family 

household is a household that includes two or more people related by birth, marriage, or adoption and 

residing together, along with any unrelated people who may be residing there. Single mothers are an 

example of female family households. For more detail, refer to the Technical Note (Appendix E).

Comparing the demographic composition of unbanked, 

underbanked, and fully banked households shows stark 

differences between these groups. The same demographic 

groups are generally overrepresented among both 

unbanked and underbanked households. However, on 

many measures, such as employment and income, underbanked households are more similar to fully banked households than to unbanked households. 

Among unbanked households, slightly more than half 

have never had a bank account. Relatively high proportions of Hispanic (14.7 percent) and foreign-born noncitizen households (18.9 percent) have never had an 

account. 

The most common reasons why households report they do 

not have bank accounts are that they feel they do not 

have enough money for an account, or they do not need 

or want one. Households that have previously had an 

account are less likely to report that they do not need or 

want an account relative to those that have never had 

one. 

Certain segments of the unbanked population are more 

inclined to open an account. While most unbanked 

households report that they are not likely to open an 

account in the future, one-third (33.9 percent) report they 

are “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to do so. Among 

unbanked households more likely to want to open a bank 

account in the future are those that were previously 

banked or that became unbanked within the last year, as 

well as those individuals who are younger, unemployed, 

have some college education, or are in family households 

headed by an unmarried woman. The likelihood of opening a bank account also increases with AFS use and with 

the use of a payroll card or a prepaid debit card.
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underaned Households  •

Use of Alternative Financial Services and Prepaid 

Debit Cards

About 25 percent of households, including all underbanked households and 64.9 percent of unbanked households, have used AFS in the last year. The use of both 

transaction and credit AFS became more widespread 

between 2009 and 2011, with higher proportions of households reporting having used either product. 

AFS transaction products (i.e., non-bank money orders, 

non-bank check cashing, and non-bank remittances) are 

considerably more widely used than AFS credit products 

(i.e., payday loans, pawn shops, rent-to-own stores, and 

refund anticipation loans). In the last year, 23.3 percent of 

households used transaction AFS and 6.0 percent used 

AFS credit product. 

The relationship between household banking status and 

AFS use is complex. A non-trivial share of unbanked 

households (29.5 percent) do not use any of the AFS 

providers asked about in the survey, suggesting they rely 

primarily on cash. However, overall, unbanked households 

are more active AFS users than underbanked households. 

Unbanked households are more likely to use multiple 

products and to have used AFS, particularly transaction 

products, more recently and more frequently than underbanked households. The use of AFS credit products does 

not differ markedly between unbanked and underbanked 

households, except for payday lending, which typically 

requires a bank account, making it more prevalent among 

the underbanked.

Unbanked and underbanked households value the convenience of transaction AFS and perceive AFS credit to be 

easier to obtain than bank credit. The most common 

reason households use transaction AFS is convenience, 

while the main reason households use AFS credit products 

is because they are easier or faster to obtain than bank 

credit. The main reason many unbanked households use 

AFS providers for transaction services is because they do 

not have a bank account. Among underbanked households, the ability to get money faster and the perceived 

lower cost of non-bank money orders were also common 

reasons for using AFS providers.

Although not considered AFS in this survey, prepaid debit 

cards continue to be more widely used among the 

unbanked and underbanked than among fully banked 

households. With one in ten households reporting use of a 

prepaid debit card, overall use of the product appears to be 

relatively stable from 2009. However, the proportion of 

unbanked households that have used a prepaid debit card 

climbed from 12.2 percent to 17.8 percent in 2011, with 

no significant change among the underbanked. 

Implications

The survey results presented in this report suggest four 

lessons for policymakers, financial institutions, and other 

stakeholders working to improve access to financial 

services. 

1. Understanding the characteristics of different 

segments of the unbanked and underbanked populations 

might increase the efficacy of economic inclusion strategies. Different subgroups among unbanked and underbanked households have different characteristics and 

varying levels of demand for banking services. Understanding these differences could lead to the development 

of products and strategies that more effectively engage 

these households. For example, economic inclusion strategies that target unbanked Hispanic households might 

consider that this group includes two distinct segments 

with starkly different financial services behavior. One 

substantial segment (29.6 percent) of this group does not 

use any financial services from bank or non-bank providers, while another uses AFS more actively than any other 

ethnic or racial group: 51.8 percent of unbanked Hispanics used AFS in the last 30 days, including almost a quarter (22.5 percent) who used two or more AFS in that 

period. In contrast, among other unbanked segments, only 

about 43 percent of white or black households used AFS 

in the last 30 days and about 14 percent used two or more 

in that time frame. 

In many cases, underbanked households, and particularly 

unbanked households, face challenging economic circumstances, such as unemployment. Understanding these 

families’ varying situations could help drive collaborative 

efforts between financial institutions and public and 

private entities that serve other needs of this population 

(e.g., employment or social services agencies). 

2. Having a bank account does not guarantee long-term 

participation in the banking system. Households can and 

do cycle in and out the banking system over time. For 

example, nearly half of unbanked households had an 

account in the past, and nearly half (48.2 percent) of 

these report that they are likely to join the banking system 

again in the future. Also, almost a quarter of fully banked 

households have used AFS in the past and could have 

been considered underbanked at that time. Economic 

inclusion efforts require not only banking the unbanked, 

but also retaining and better engaging current bank 

customers to prevent them from becoming unbanked or 

underbanked. The offering of low-cost deposit accounts 

with transparent fee structures could play an important 

role in this effort.

3. Households with banking experience appear to have 

more positive perceptions of having an account and rely 

less on AFS. Unbanked households that previously had a 
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underaned Households  •

relationship with a financial institution are more likely to 

see value in having a bank account than unbanked households without this relationship. Previously banked households are more likely to want to open an account in the 

future and less likely to say that the main reason they are 

unbanked is because they “do not want or need an 

account.” 

In addition, survey results show that households that have 

an account, particularly a checking account, tend to use 

transaction AFS less actively than those that do not have 

a checking account. On average, unbanked households are 

more active transaction AFS users than the underbanked. 

Even among underbanked households, those that only 

have a savings account are more active transaction AFS 

users than underbanked households that have a checking 

account.

4. Financial institutions interested in pursuing the 

market opportunity that AFS users present might need 

to more clearly demonstrate the value in having a bank 

account to AFS users who perceive non-bank financial 

services to be more convenient, faster, less expensive, or 

to present lower barriers to qualification. For example, 

banks might find it useful to promote mobile technology 

to increase convenience, thereby addressing the most 

commonly reported reason households use non-bank 

check cashers. In addition, for the notable share of 

unbanked and underbanked consumers who cited speed as 

a reason for using non-bank check cashing, efforts toward 

expediting the availability of deposited funds might make 

deposit accounts more appealing. Making affordable smalldollar loans available with streamlined but solid underwriting could help attract consumers who currently rely 

on credit AFS.