QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

45 

THE EFFECTS OF POPULATION CHANGE ON 

COMMUNITY BANK DEPOSITS AND LOANS

OVERVIEW Over the past several decades, total U.S. population growth has been 

strong, but regional and county-level growth has varied widely. The 

county-level growth variability has had significant distributional 

effects, with population shifting both between regions of the country 

and within states, generally leading to more urban growth and rural 

population decline. This analysis summarizes recent population growth 

trends and estimates the impacts of population changes on bank 

deposits and loan portfolios for community banks based on data going 

back more than 20 years.1 These estimates may be useful to community 

bankers in planning for growth and allocating resources toward 

supplying loans to meet new demand, as the effects of population 

growth vary between counties of differing population densities.

Deposits across banks at the county level grow as populations expand. 

Bank branches in metropolitan counties see faster deposit growth than 

do branches in micropolitan and rural counties, in which deposits tend 

to lag population changes by about a year.2 Deposits in community 

banks in metropolitan counties tend to grow at roughly the same 

rate as population growth, while deposits in community banks in 

less-populous counties grow at a much slower rate. When population 

decreases, deposits still grow in community banks in metropolitan 

counties but decline in community banks in micropolitan and rural 

counties.

As with total deposits, population growth generally leads to higher 

loan volumes at local community banks.3 This analysis finds that the 

effects of population growth on loan portfolio composition also differ 

among metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural counties. For commercial 

and industrial (C&I) loans and agricultural loans, population growth 

is associated with greater loan concentrations in some county types 

but lower loan concentrations in other county types. For commercial 

real estate loans (CRE) and single-family residential loans, population 

growth positively correlates with increases in loan concentrations 

across all county types, but the magnitude of the effect differs between

1 Community banks are defined by asset size, business plan, geographic footprint, and number of branches. For the complete definition, see “FDIC Community Banking Study,” 

December 2012, https://www.fdic.gov/resources/community-banking/report/2012/2012-cbi-study-full.pdf.

2 County types are defined by Office of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties contain a core urban area of at least 50,000 or more in population. 

Micropolitan counties contain an urban core of at least 10,000 but less than 50,000 in population. All other counties are rural.

3 Throughout this article, references to loans, loan volumes, and loan shares are always in terms of value.
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

46 

county types. Some U.S. population growth patterns reversed during the 

pandemic as individuals fled densely populated cities for less-densely 

populated micropolitan and rural counties. These new population 

trends, if they persist, could significantly affect the deposits and loan 

portfolios of community banks, and community banks may need to 

adapt their business models to changing local conditions.

Long-term population trends have the potential to deeply affect 

community banks. Rural depopulation reduces deposit funding and 

can challenge bank lending in such communities. Previous FDIC 

studies have found that these trends extend well beyond the past 

two decades: more than one-third of rural counties reached their 

peak populations before 1930.4 This has led some community banks 

in counties with decreasing populations to focus on agricultural 

loans as demand for other loan types declined. In a self-reinforcing 

cycle, focus on agricultural loans can preclude the development of 

expertise in other loan types, consequently further restricting lending 

options for local communities. Alternatively, other banks opened 

branches in nearby micropolitan and metropolitan regions to diversify 

their loan portfolios.5 This study further investigates the effects of 

population change on deposits and lending in rural, micropolitan, and 

metropolitan counties and suggests implications for changes in these 

trends after the 2020 pandemic.

Banking data are drawn from the FDIC Summary of Deposits (SOD) for 

branch-level variables and FDIC Consolidated Reports of Condition 

and Income (Call Reports) for bank-level variables. County-level 

population data are drawn from the U.S. Census, while indicators for 

metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural counties are fixed at their year 

2000 designations and come from the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

(USDA). Other county-level control variables include average age and 

gender ratios (Census), employment (USDA), and personal income 

(Bureau of Economic Analysis). All data are annual spanning 2000 to 

2022, inclusive.

4 John M. Anderlik and Richard D. Cofer Jr., “Long-Term Trends in Rural Depopulation and Their Implications for Community Banks,” FDIC Quarterly 8, no. 2 (2014): 44–59, 

https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/quarterly-banking-profile/fdic-quarterly/2014-vol8-2/article2.pdf.

5 Jeffrey Walser and John Anderlik, “Rural Depopulation: What Does It Mean for the Future Economic Health of Rural Areas and the Community Banks That Support Them?” 

FDIC Banking Review 16, no.3 (2004): 57–95, https://archive.fdic.gov/view/fdic/9811.
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

47 

DEPOSIT GROWTH RESPONSE TO 

POPULATION CHANGE VARIES 

AMONG COUNTY TYPES

Population changes have significant implications for deposits at 

community banks. In aggregate, a 1 percent change in population is 

correlated with a 0.6 percent change in deposits (Chart 1). However, 

this relationship changes significantly if we separately analyze 

population increases and population declines. Population decreases 

are not statistically correlated with any change in community bank 

deposits, but there is a strong correlation between population increase 

and deposit growth. Specifically, a 1 percent increase in population 

is strongly correlated with a 0.86 percent increase in community 

bank deposits. These results are robust across the range of values for 

population growth that is typical for counties in the past 20 years.6

The relationship between deposits and population growth becomes 

more nuanced when county types are disaggregated among 

metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural counties. Metropolitan counties 

respond most to population growth; deposit growth actually outpaces 

population growth, with a 1 percent increase in population generating 

1.12 percent growth in community bank deposits. In metropolitan 

counties with declining population, which included about a third of 

metropolitan counties over the five years ending in June 2022, total 

deposits at community banks were unaffected by population decreases.

6 Analysis of the counties that had the sharpest accelerations and decelerations in population growth or the strongest growth reversals revealed no significant additional 

relationship with deposits.

Deposits in Metropolitan Counties Increase More Sharply With Population

Growth but Are Uncorrelated With Population Decline

Chart 1

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core

populations greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

The coeicient is the multiplier eect of a 1 percentage point change in population growth on deposit growth.

*No statistically significant relationship between aggregate or metropolitan population declines and deposit growth.

Multiplier Eect of Population Change

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

All Population Changes Population Declines Population Increases

All Counties Metropolitan Micropolitan Rural

* * 
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

48 

Deposits at community banks in micropolitan and rural counties grow 

significantly more slowly than population. In micropolitan counties, 

a 1 percent increase in population generates only 0.69 percent more 

deposits. In rural counties, the difference is even greater, as the same 

population increase is correlated with only 0.23 percent more deposits. 

This result may have implications for micropolitan and rural counties 

that have seen recent reversals in population growth trend, in that 

community banks may not see deposit growth commensurate with 

population increases. When population decreases in micropolitan and 

rural counties, total deposits in those counties typically decrease but at 

a slower rate than the rate of population decrease: for every 1 percent 

decrease in population, there is a 0.39 percent decrease in deposits in 

micropolitan counties and a 0.33 percent decrease in deposits in rural 

counties.

TIMING OF POPULATION CHANGES IS 

NOT A STRONG PREDICTOR OF 

TIMING OF DEPOSIT CHANGES

As county populations change, deposits in banks in those counties tend 

to also change: on average, a 1 percent change in population leads to 

between a 0.9 percent and 2 percent change in deposits. However, the 

speed at which deposits respond to population change differs across 

county types. In metropolitan counties, the strongest correlation 

suggests that population and deposits change simultaneously 

(Chart 2).7 In micropolitan and rural counties, the correlation between 

population growth and community bank deposit growth peaks 

following a one-year lag, suggesting that deposits do not move into 

micropolitan and rural counties as quickly as they do in metropolitan 

counties.

While metropolitan counties report the strongest correlation 

between community bank deposits and population changes several 

years before and after a population decline, the strength of the 

correlation is weak (Chart 3). For micropolitan counties, correlation 

peaks contemporaneously with population outflows, while in rural 

counties correlation peaks in the year following a population decrease. 

These correlations, however, are even weaker than correlations in 

metropolitan counties.

7 In the case of metropolitan counties, correlation is marginally stronger in the year preceding population growth, which may indicate depositors moving funds into a county 

before taking up residency, but which may also simply be an artifact of when in the year data are recorded. SOD data are recorded as of June 30 each year, while population data 

are gathered using surveys conducted throughout the year. 
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

49 

Correlations between population changes and community bank 

deposits are generally very weak. This indicates that the timing of 

population increase or decrease is not a strong predictor for when 

deposits may follow suit. This relationship becomes even weaker when 

considering deposit outflows. The weakness may arise from the relative 

rarity of deposit decreases and the insensitivity of bank deposits to 

population declines, especially in metropolitan counties.

The Correlation of Deposits With Population Inflows 

Peaks Later in Rural Counties

Chart 2

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core populations 

greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Correlation

#

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

T-3 T-2 T-1 T T+1 T+2 T+3

Aggregate Metropolitan Micropolitan Rural

Preceding, Contemporaneous, and Subsequent Years

The Correlation of Deposits With Population Outflows 

Peaks Latest in Metropolitan Counties

Chart 3

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core populations 

greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Correlation

Aggregate Metropolitan Micropolitan Rural

Preceding, Contemporaneous, and Subsequent Years

#

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

T-3 T-2 T-1 T T+1 T+2 T+3
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

50 

RURAL COUNTIES HAVE MORE 

AGRICULTURAL LOANS; 

METROPOLITAN COUNTIES HAVE 

MORE CRE LOANS

The distribution of loans varies across community banks in rural, 

micropolitan, and metropolitan counties.8 Community banks with 

most of their deposits in rural counties have relatively more 

agricultural loans, about 30 percent of total loans by value. The share 

of agricultural loans by value falls to 17 percent for micropolitan 

banks and 5 percent for metropolitan banks (Charts 4 and 5). Banks in 

metropolitan counties have more CRE loans, on average accounting 

for 38 percent of loans by value. The share of CRE loans by value falls 

to 26 percent for micropolitan banks and to 18 percent for rural banks. 

Micropolitan banks have the highest share of residential loans by 

value, at 35 percent, though the share at metropolitan banks is only 

marginally lower at 33 percent. At community banks in rural counties, 

residential loans on average make up 27 percent of total loans by value. 

C&I loans typically represent 13 to 15 percent of total loans by value, 

regardless of county type.

8 Loan data are reported to the FDIC at the bank level, not the branch level, and so direct correlation between loans and county type is difficult. This study uses the approach 

of creating synthetic counties for each bank with characteristics constructed as the weighted average of all counties in which a bank has branches, with each county’s weight 

calculated as the local share of total bank deposits.

Banks With Deposits Mostly in Metropolitan Counties Concentrate

More on Commercial Real Estate Loans and Less on Agricultural Loans

Chart 4

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget.

Note: Horizontal axis categories indicate location of deposits. "Mostly" indicates at least 70 percent of deposits in referenced 

county type. Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core

populations greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Share of Loans

#

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

All Banks Mostly Metropolitan Mostly Micropolitan Mostly Rural

Agricultural Commercial & Industrial

Commercial Real Estate Residential
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

51 

POPULATION GROWTH CORRELATES 

WITH LOAN PORTFOLIO GROWTH 

BUT VARIES BY COUNTY TYPE

Loan volume growth is positively associated with population growth, 

with effects varying by geography. At community banks with deposits 

that are mostly in metropolitan counties, loan volume growth 

correlates with population growth at a one-to-one ratio: 1 percent 

population growth correlates to 0.98 percent growth in total loan value. 

In micropolitan counties, loan growth slightly exceeds population 

growth at 1.13 percent loan growth for every 1 percent growth in 

population. In rural counties, loan growth falls short of population 

growth, with 1 percent population growth correlated with only 0.68 

percent loan growth.

Population growth is associated with changes in loan portfolio 

composition at community banks, and these effects vary by county 

type, especially for agricultural loans and for C&I loans. In general, 

population growth is correlated with a decrease in agricultural loans 

as a share of total loans, with each percentage point growth in county 

population reducing the share of agricultural loans by 10 basis points 

(Chart 6). This reduction accelerates to 18 basis points in micropolitan 

and rural counties, but the direction reverses to a 10 basis point increase 

in metropolitan counties, which is an unexpected result.9 For aggregate 

C&I loans, there is no clear relationship between population

9 Possible explanations include larger population bases allowing for expansion of agricultural loans in metropolitan counties or that metropolitan county banks open branches 

along the metropolitan county periphery, where more agriculture is possible. The cause of this relationship is beyond the scope of this analysis but may be investigated in 

future research.

Banks With Deposits Across Diverse County Types 

Focus More on CRE and Residential Loans

Chart 5

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget.

Note: Horizontal axis categories indicate location of deposits. Categories with two county types reflect banks with 40 to 70 

percent of deposits in both referenced county types. "No Focus" reflects banks with less than 40 percent of deposits in each 

county type. Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core 

populations greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Share of Loans

#

Agricultural Commercial & Industrial

Commercial Real Estate Residential

#

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

Metropolitan &

Micropolitan

Metropolitan & Rural Micropolitan & Rural No Focus

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget.

Note: Horizontal axis categories indicate location of deposits. Categories with two county types reflect banks with 40 to 70 percent of deposits in 

both referenced county types. "No Focus" reflects banks with less than 40 percent of deposits in each county type. Counties defined by Oice of 

Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core populations greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 

to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

52 

changes and loan portfolio share; however, relationships emerge after 

differentiating by county types. In metropolitan and rural counties, a 1 

percent population increase is correlated with a 9 basis point decrease 

in loan portfolio share. In micropolitan counties, the relationship 

reverses to a 7 basis point increase.

For other loan types, the direction of the effect of population growth 

on loan portfolio shares is consistent across county types; only the 

magnitude differs. For CRE loans nationally, a 1 percent increase in 

population correlates with a 30 basis point increase in loan portfolio 

share. Banks in metropolitan and micropolitan counties experience a 

greater increase at 37 basis points. The increase is less pronounced for 

banks in rural counties at only 12 basis points. For residential loans 

nationally, a 1 percent increase in population correlates with a 19 basis 

point decline in loan portfolio share. This decline accelerates to 34 basis 

points in metropolitan and micropolitan counties; however, in rural 

counties the effect of population growth is negligible on residential 

loan share—a less than 1 basis point decline.

In summary, population growth generally is associated with higher CRE 

loan concentrations and consequently lower relative concentrations 

of agricultural, C&I, and residential loans. This relationship does not 

hold for agricultural loans in metropolitan counties, for C&I loans in 

micropolitan counties, and for residential loans in rural counties.

Population Growth Correlates to Lower Loan Shares of Agricultural and

Residential Loans and Higher Shares of Commercial Real Estate Loans

Chart 6

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core 

populations greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Coeicients on C&I loan shares are significant only at the 10 percent threshold. All others at 5 percent.

*On average, there is no significant eect of population growth on C&I loan share nationally or on residential loan 

share in rural counties.

Change in Loan Portfolio Share

Aer 1 Percent Population Growth

(Percent)

#

Agricultural Commercial &

Industrial

Commercial

Real Estate

Residential -0.30

-0.20

-0.10

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40 All Counties Metropolitan

Micropolitan Rural

* *
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

53 

POPULATION GROWTH IN 2021 

DIVERGED FROM THE PRE-PANDEMIC 

PATTERN

A well-documented trend of rural depopulation has extended back 

to at least the 1970s.10 Rural counties are disproportionately likely 

to have declining populations, with more than 60 percent of rural 

counties shrinking between 2018 and 2020. Since 2010, aggregate 

rural population has fallen almost every year (Chart 7). In contrast, 

population growth in metropolitan counties has outpaced aggregate 

U.S. population growth, averaging nearly 1 percentage point growth 

annually since 2000. Micropolitan counties have also seen robust 

growth, although not nearly at the rates of metropolitan counties.

10 See Anderlik and Cofer, “Long-Term Trends in Rural Development,” and Kenneth M. Johnson and Daniel T. Lichter, “Rural Depopulation: Growth and Decline Processes Over 

the Past Century,” Rural Sociology 84, no. 1 (2019):3-27, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ruso.12266, among others.

Rural Populations Have Mostly Decreased Since 2010, While

Metropolitan County Populations Have Grown the Fastest

Chart 7

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core populations

greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Annual Percent

Change in Population

Metropolitan Micropolitan Rural

#

-1.00

-0.75

-0.50

-0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022

Some Long-Term Population Trends Reversed Aer the 2020 Pandemic

Chart 8

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core 

populations greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Annual Change

Percent 

#

Post-Pandemic

2021 to 2022

Pre-Pandemic

2010 to 2020

Post-Pandemic

2021 to 2022

Pre-Pandemic

2010 to 2020

All Counties Metropolitan Micropolitan Rural

Aggregate Population Growth County-Level Average Population Growth

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

54 

The 2020 pandemic spurred significant changes in population growth 

patterns. Dense urban centers, where maintaining social distancing 

was more difficult, became less desirable. Given the exigencies of the 

pandemic, 2020 may not be a representative year for population trends. 

Looking to 2021 may provide better insight into trends that could 

prove to be persistent. In 2021, the data reveal a complete reversal in 

pre-pandemic growth trends, with rural population growing faster 

than any other county type, followed by micropolitan counties, and 

finally metropolitan counties. Because aggregate statistics are often 

driven by the largest counties and may obscure trends in smaller 

“average” counties, Chart 8 compares growth trends both in total 

population and in averages across counties. The left side of the 

chart shows how aggregate metropolitan county population growth 

plummeted in 2021. However, the right side shows that the county 

average continued to grow at the same pace, which implies a reshuffling 

of growth from big cities to smaller cities and suburban counties. 

The largest metropolises were the most likely to see large population 

growth deceleration or outright declines: population declined in the top 

three most populous U.S. counties and eight of the ten most populous 

U.S. counties.11 Given these declines, smaller metropolitan counties may 

have benefited from flight from urban centers. Future data will reveal 

the extent to which these novel trends prove persistent.

In the two years before the pandemic, population growth was 

concentrated in metropolitan counties, and 69 percent (753 counties) 

of those counties expanded. This compares with 47 percent of 

micropolitan counties and 39 percent of rural counties. Growth was 

strongest in the West, Upper Midwest, Texas, Florida, and the Northeast 

(Map 1). After onset of the pandemic, population growth broadened. 

Generally the same regions of the country continued to grow, but 

counties that were farther from urban centers and were previously 

shrinking or were growing anemically reported robust growth 

comparable to metropolitan centers before the pandemic (Map 2).

In 2021, aggregate U.S. population growth fell sharply, but the number 

of counties that were growing increased, and the vast majority of newly 

growing counties were micropolitan or rural. The share of metropolitan 

counties with population growth was essentially flat at roughly 70 

percent, the number of growing counties ticking up only slightly from 

753 to 760 (Table 1). For rural counties, this share rose from 39 percent 

to 44 percent as the number of growing rural counties rose from 541 to 

603. Micropolitan counties saw the greatest gains: the share of growing 

counties rose from 47 percent to 58 percent as the number of growing 

micropolitan counties rose from 319 to 391.

11 U.S. Census and FDIC staff analysis.
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

55 

Map 1

Pre-Pandemic Population Growth Was Concentrated 

Around Metropolitan Counties

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Decreasing indicates growth rate below 0 percent. Moderate growth indicates growth between

0 and 0.96 percent. High growth captures the top quartile of the entire 2018 to 2022 period with 

growth more than 0.96 percent.

Moderate Growth

Decreasing

High Growth

Population Growth Rates, 2018 to 2019

Map 2

Post-Pandemic Population Growth 

Was More Dispersed

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Decreasing indicates growth rate below 0 percent. Moderate growth indicates growth between

0 and 0.96 percent. High growth captures the top quartile of the entire 2018 to 2022 period with 

growth more than 0.96 percent.

Moderate Growth

Decreasing

High Growth

Population Growth Rates, 2020 to 2022

Table 1

County Population Growth Statistics Before and After 2020

Growth Decline

2018 to 2019 2020 to 2022 2018 to 2019 2020 to 2022

Count Share Count Share Count Share Count Share

Metropolitan 753 69.1 769 71.0 336 30.9 314 29.0

Micropolitan 319 47.3 365 54.2 356 52.7 308 45.8

Rural 541 39.3 599 43.4 837 60.7 780 56.6

Total 1,613 51.3 1,733 55.3 1,529 48.7 1,402 44.7

Sources: Office of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

56 

DEPOSITS SURGED AFTER 2020, AND 

GEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS MIRRORED 

POPULATION GROWTH

Because of the unique nature of the 2020 pandemic, its attendant 

recession, and robust government support programs for households 

and businesses, deposits grew at unprecedented rates in banks across 

the country. Chart 9 shows that post-pandemic trends in deposit 

growth were not driven by outliers but were broadly experienced by 

counties of all population levels. Before the pandemic, metropolitan 

counties reported average annual deposit growth of 5.7 percent; after 

the pandemic, growth surged to 12.7 percent. Post-pandemic increases 

were even more dramatic in micropolitan and rural counties. From 2010 

to 2020, micropolitan counties reported average deposit growth of 4.2 

percent, which rose to 12.2 percent in 2021. For rural counties, average 

deposit growth rose from 4 percent to 11.8 percent. Post-pandemic, 

the average metropolitan county continued to see faster deposit 

growth than the average rural county, but deposit growth rates largely 

converged (Chart 10). In terms of aggregate deposit growth—as opposed 

to county-level averages—rural and micropolitan counties saw jumps 

in 2021 that exceeded growth in metropolitan counties.

Population Growth Accelerated in Northern and Great Plains Rural 

Counties and Western Micropolitan Counties 

Map 3

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: This map shows counties in the top quartile (across all counties) of post-pandemic acceleration in county population

growth rates, with acceleration exceeding 0.76 percentage points.

Moderate Growth

Decreasing

High Growth

Counties With High Acceleration in

Population Growth Rates Aer 2020

New population growth was not distributed evenly across the country. 

Among rural counties, population growth accelerated most sharply in 

counties in the North and in the Great Plains states in the Midwest (Map 3). 

Micropolitan counties reporting the greatest leaps in population growth 

were sprinkled throughout the United States but with slightly higher 

concentrations in the Northeast and the Mountain West. The biggest 

accelerations in population growth among metropolitan counties were 

concentrated in the Northeast.
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

57 

All County Types Have Reported Long-Term Deposit Growth,

With Higher Growth Rates in Metropolitan Counties

Chart 9

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core

populations greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Annual Percent

Change in Deposits

Metropolitan Micropolitan Rural

0

5

10

15

20

25

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022

Community Bank Deposits Surged A
er the 2020 Pandemic

Chart 10

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Counties defined by Oice of Management and Budget guidelines. Metropolitan counties have urban core 

populations greater than 50,000; micropolitan counties have 10,000 to 50,000; rural counties have less than 10,000.

Annual Change

Percent 

#

Post-Pandemic

2021 to 2022

Pre-Pandemic

2010 to 2020

Post-Pandemic

2021 to 2022

Pre-Pandemic

2010 to 2020

All Counties Metropolitan Micropolitan Rural

County-Level Average Community Bank

Deposits Growth

Aggregate Community Bank

Deposits Growth

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

58 

Map 4

Pre-Pandemic Growth in Deposits Was Strongest in the

Mountain West and South

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Decreasing indicates growth rate below 0 percent. Moderate growth indicates growth between

0 and 4.56 percent. High growth captures the top quartile with growth more than 4.56 percent.

Moderate Growth

Decreasing

No Data

High Growth

Total County Deposits

Growth Rates, 2018 to 2019

Map 5

Post-Pandemic Growth in Deposits Broadened to Include 

More Rural Counties

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: Moderate growth indicates growth between 0 and 12.42 percent. High growth captures the top 

quartile with growth more than 12.42 percent.

Moderate Growth

No Data

High Growth

Total County Deposits

Growth Rates, 2020 to 2022

Table 2

County-Level Deposits Growth Statistics Before and After 2020

Growth Decline

2018 to 2019 2020 to 2022 2018 to 2019 2020 to 2022

Count Share Count Share Count Share Count Share

Metropolitan 909 83.8 1,062 97.8 176 16.2 24 2.2

Micropolitan 531 79.0 661 98.4 141 21.0 11 1.6

Rural 1,011 74.8 1,311 96.9 341 25.2 42 3.1

Total 2,451 78.8 3,034 97.5 658 21.2 77 2.5

Sources: Office of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Deposit growth was far more common than population growth before 

the pandemic. From 2018 to 2019, about half of all counties were 

growing in population, but over the same period almost 80 percent of 

counties—2,451 counties—saw total deposits across local community 

bank branches rise (Table 2). From 2020 to 2021, the share of counties 

with growing deposits jumped to 98 percent. The geography of deposit 

growth broadened to include more counties, with rural counties 

representing the bulk of this broadening (Maps 4 and 5).
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

59 

The counties in which deposit growth accelerated the most do not 

match the counties in which population growth accelerated the most. 

For rural counties, deposit growth increased the most in the North and 

Great Plains but also in the Mountain West (Map 5). In micropolitan 

counties, deposit growth acceleration was most pronounced in the 

Mountain West but also along the coast in Northern California and 

Southern Oregon as well as upstate New York (Map 6). For metropolitan 

counties, deposit growth concentrations occurred in the Southwest and 

Northwest, despite greater population growth in the Northeast.

Growth in Deposits Accelerated Most in Northern Rural Counties and 

Western Micropolitan Counties 

Map 6

Sources: FDIC, Oice of Management and Budget, U.S. Census.

Note: This map shows counties in the top quartile (across all counties) of post-pandemic acceleration in total county

deposit growth rates, with acceleration exceeding 11.46 percentage points. 

Micropolitan

Rural

Metropolitan

Counties With High Acceleration in

Total Deposit Growth Rates Aer 2020
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

60 

CONCLUSION As population has grown and shifted across the United States over 

the past several decades, community bank managers, executives, and 

boards have had to consider the implications of population changes on 

their business models. Among these considerations are how to prepare 

for changes in deposits and how to allocate resources toward offering 

different types of loans. This analysis has attempted to quantify the 

impact of population growth on deposits and loans and to show how 

these relationships differ between metropolitan, micropolitan, and 

rural counties. While the results reflect relationships existing over two 

decades in the 2000s before the 2020 pandemic, they may yet be useful 

in considering effects of future changes in population.

The 2020 pandemic significantly altered pre-existing patterns of 

population growth across the country. If these changes persist in 

coming years, they may meaningfully affect both deposit growth and 

loan portfolios at community banks. Given the time delays and lower 

multiplier effects of population changes on deposits, banks in rural 

counties could see deposits continue to rise even if population growth 

decelerates or reverses, while banks in more populous counties may 

see sharper adjustments. Population changes may be associated with 

increasing loan concentrations. Community banks in rural counties 

may encounter greater relative demand for nonagricultural loans. The 

share of CRE loans in bank portfolios may rise in growing counties, 

while the relative demand for residential loans will likely fall. If the 

historical relationships outlined in this study continue to hold in 

coming years, changes in population growth patterns may require 

community banks to adjust their loan offerings and business practices 

to meet new demands.

Author:

Jared Rothman

Senior Financial Economist

Division of Insurance and Research
QUARTERLY 2024 VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1

61 

APPENDIX: REPORTING STANDARDS 

FOR LOCATION OF BRANCH-LEVEL 

DEPOSITS

The Summary of Deposits Survey includes the main office and each 

branch office location operating on June 30 of the survey year and 

requires institutions to report the deposits assigned to each office 

location.12 However, banks are allowed significant discretion in how 

they determine the location of deposits and are encouraged to report 

these locations in a way consistent with their existing internal recordkeeping practices. Common systems for assigning deposit locations 

include

y office in closest proximity to the accountholder’s address

y office with highest level of account activity

y office where the original deposit account was opened

y office chosen based on branch manager compensation guidelines.

These conditions imply a significant caveat to any geographical analysis 

of deposits. Banks are not required to shift deposits between branches 

as accountholders move around the country. Accounts may remain at 

the original branch long after the accountholder has left; may be moved 

to where the accountholder is most often using banking services, even 

if the accountholder lives in another county; or may be assigned to a 

branch for reasons independent of the location of the accountholder. 

Results reported in this analysis should be understood in context of 

these data limitations, which may affect the magnitude of correlations 

and multiplier coefficients.

12 FDIC, “Summary of Deposits Reporting Instructions,” June 30, 2022, https://www.fdic.gov/resources/bankers/call-reports/call-summary-of-deposits.html.