Credit standards · Auto loan credit standards
GM FINANCIAL CONSUMER AUTOMOBILE RECEIVABLES TRUST
Summary statistics computed from the Form ABS-EE asset-level file for this shelf, filed 2026-08-20. Regulation AB II requires this loan-level data for registered public auto-loan securitizations, so every figure below is a statement about a named, dated SEC filing — not about a company.
733 loans analysed, sampled systematically (every 20th record) from 14,662 records. CIK 1944019. Source filing.
Distributions
| Measure | 5th | 25th | Median | 75th | 95th |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Credit score | 661 | 727 | 779 | 825 | 860 |
| APR | 0.0% | 2.9% | 4.0% | 5.5% | 8.6% |
| Payment-to-income | 2.7% | 5.1% | 7.5% | 10.8% | 14.9% |
| Term (months) | 61 | 73 | 74 | 76 | 86 |
| Loan-to-value | 51.0% | 80.4% | 96.5% | 112.7% | 132.3% |
| Vehicle model year | 2016 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2022 |
By credit score band
| Band | Range | Loans | Share | Median APR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| subprime | 501-600 | 2 | 0.3% | 9.2% |
| near prime | 601-660 | 35 | 4.8% | 7.2% |
| prime | 661-780 | 338 | 46.1% | 4.9% |
| super prime | 781-900 | 355 | 48.4% | 3.5% |
Pool composition
- Originators: GM FINANCIAL (733)
- Used vehicles: 27.1%
- Co-obligor present: 31.5%
- Zero-APR loans: 7.2%
- States present: 46
- Top states: TX (102), CA (68), FL (49), MI (48), OH (44), NY (42), IL (36), LA (26)
What this is not
Not underwriting guidelines. Not a comparison of lenders. Not a description of any lender's programs or current practices. Each row describes one securitized pool, as reported in one filing, on one date - a sponsor-selected subset of what an originator funded. Issuers securitizing privately under Rule 144A file no asset-level data and are absent by construction.
Income and employment verification appear in the file only as raw Schedule AL codes (2, 3 and 2, 3). Their meanings are not asserted here — the filer's codebook is the only authority for what a code means, and this shelf published none.
underwritingIndicator is recorded upstream but omitted here: filers apply it inconsistently and it cannot be read as an exception rate. Verification codes are raw and are not comparable across filers. LTV carries a per-shelf comparability flag.
Method: how these figures are computed. Data generated 2026-08-25 from the filing above.