UAD 3.6 series Part 6 of 7

The Signal / UAD 3.6 / October 17, 2026

The grid shows its workComparable Weight, time adjustments and the comps left out under UAD 3.6

The UAD 3.6 sales comparison grid records three things the legacy 1004 never had a field for: how much the appraiser relied on each comparable, a time adjustment tied to each contract date, and the properties considered and set aside. A reviewer can now read that reasoning as data.

Start reading Try the time-adjustment calculator

By Hansel Dobbs, MNAA, CDEI · 16 minute read

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share by email

AI-generated illustration of a fictional streetResearch checked October 17, 20268 chapters

The Sales Comparison Approach is the longest chapter in the GSEs’ reference guide to the redesigned URAR, pages 214 to 282 of 378.¹ Most of what changed for collateral review sits in its grid.

This is Part 6 of our UAD 3.6 series. Part 1 covered how the report decides its own shape; this part stays inside the grid. It walks through the GSE sample reports’ actual numbers: SF1, a single-family house with three comparables and five properties it analyzed and did not use, and a four-unit sample whose time adjustments run about 1% a month.^3,4 Part 7 picks up where this one stops, at the reconciliation of the whole report.

01 / A grid that changesFixed rows to conditional rows

From 18 printed rows to a grid that adds rows when the property needs them

Page 2 of the legacy Form 1004 prints 18 feature rows, from Sale or Financing Concessions to Porch/Patio/Deck, and 3 blank numbered lines for anything else. Every property got the same rows. The page has no row for how much each comparable counted and no place to record a property the appraiser looked at and set aside.⁵

The URAR grid is built from up to 12 subsections. Seven always display; the others appear when the facts call for them, such as Project Information for a condominium or Water Frontage with Private Access for a lakefront house.¹

Legacy Form 1004 page 2 sales comparison grid: fixed rows for Location, View, Design, Quality, Age, Condition, Room Count, Gross Living Area and others, three blank numbered lines, and Net and Adjusted Sale Price rows. There is no weight row. — Left: Form 1004/70, March 2005, p. 2.⁵ Right: Appendix C-1, URAR layout v1.3, p. 29.⁶ The URAR rows below Adjusted Price, Comparable Weight and the table of properties not used, have no legacy counterpart.

Blank URAR grid Summary from Appendix C-1: rows for List, Contract and Sale Price, Net Adjustment Total, Adjusted Price Per Unit and Per Bedroom, two price-per-area rows, Adjusted Price and Comparable Weight, then Indicated Value, Reconciliation of Sales Comparison Approach and an Additional Properties Analyzed Not Used table. — Left: Form 1004/70, March 2005, p. 2.⁵ Right: Appendix C-1, URAR layout v1.3, p. 29.⁶ The URAR rows below Adjusted Price, Comparable Weight and the table of properties not used, have no legacy counterpart.

The GSEs publish every possible grid row in a companion workbook, with three flags: whether the row always displays, displays if applicable, or may display when relevant, and whether it can carry an adjustment.² Counted across the workbook, the grid has 151 rows. Only 31 always display, and 67 can carry an adjustment.

Grid explorer

Every row the URAR sales grid can show

Pick a filter to see which rows always display, which appear when applicable or relevant, and which take an adjustment. Source: Summary of Rows in Comparable Grids v1.3, sheet “Sales Comp Grid.”²

General Informationalways · 22

Property Address
Data Source
Proximity to Subject
List Price
Listing Status
Contract Price
Sale Price
Transfer Terms
Financing Type
Sales Concessions
Contract Date
Sale Date
Days on Market
Sale to List Price Ratio
Attached/Detached
Property Rights Appraised
Annual Ground Rent
Native American Lands
All Rights Included
Rights Not Included
Same Builder as Subject
Additional row

Project Informationif applicable, or if relevant · 4

Project Name | Same Project as Subject
Monthly Fee
Common Amenities/Services
Special Assessments

Sitealways · 16

Site Owned in Common
Site Size
Neighborhood Name
Zoning Compliance
Hazard Zone
Primary Access
Street Type | Surface
Property Restriction
Easement
Topography
Drainage
Site Characteristics
Site Influence (Location)
Apparent Environmental Conditions
View | Range
Additional row

Water Frontage with Private Accessif applicable · 4

Water Frontage
Permanent Waterfront Feature
Right to Build
Total Linear Measurement

Dwelling(s)always · 17

Year Built
Structure Design
Gross Building Finished Area
Noncontinuous Finished Area
Townhouse End Unit
Townhouse Back to Back
Townhouse Location
Construction Method
Manufactured Home Width
Dwelling Style
Total Dwelling Volume
Window Surface Area
Functional Issues
Disaster Mitigation
Heating
Cooling
Additional row

Energy Efficient and Green Featuresif relevant · 3

Renewable Energy Component
Building Certification
Efficiency Rating

Unit(s)always · 15

Structure ID | Unit ID
Location of ADU
Floor Number
Corner Unit
Levels in Unit
Bedrooms
Baths, Full | Half
Finished Area Above Grade
Finished Area Above Grade (Nonstandard)
Unfinished Area Above Grade
Finished Area Below Grade
Finished Area Below Grade (Nonstandard)
Unfinished Area Below Grade
Features for Individuals w/ Disabilities
Additional row

Quality and Conditionalways · 41

Structure ID
Quality
Exterior Walls and Trim
Foundation
Roof
Windows
Other Exterior Feature
Condition
Exterior Walls and Trim
Foundation
Roof
Windows
Other Exterior Feature
Structure ID | Unit ID
Quality
Kitchen
Overall Bathrooms
Overall Flooring
Walls and Ceiling
Other Interior Feature
Condition
Kitchen
Overall Bathrooms
Overall Flooring
Walls and Ceiling
Other Interior Feature
Location of ADU
Quality
Kitchen
Overall Bathrooms
Overall Flooring
Walls and Ceiling
Other Interior Feature
Condition
Kitchen
Overall Bathrooms
Overall Flooring
Walls and Ceiling
Other Interior Feature
Quality
Condition

Property Amenitiesif relevant · 5

Outdoor Accessories
Outdoor Living
Water Features
Whole Home
Miscellaneous

Vehicle Storagealways · 2

Type | Spaces | Detail
Additional row

Outbuildingif applicable · 12

Outbuilding Type
Gross Building Area
Finished Area
Unfinished Area
Structure Volume
Baths, Full
Baths - Half
Kitchens
Heating
Cooling
Utilities
Additional row

Summaryalways · 10

List Price
Contract Price
Sale Price
Net Adjustment Total
Adjusted Price Per Unit
Adjusted Price Per Bedroom
Price Per Gross Building Finished Area
Price Per Finished Area Above Grade
Adjusted Price
Comparable Weight

Always displays
If applicable
May display
Dot: adjustable

151 rows, one square each. Point at a square for its name.

Every row by name

General Information

Property Address
Data Source
Proximity to Subject
List Price
Listing Status
Contract Price
Sale Price
Transfer Terms±
Financing Type±
Sales Concessions±
Contract Date±
Sale Date±
Days on Market
Sale to List Price Ratio±
Attached/Detached±
Property Rights Appraised±
Annual Ground Rent
Native American Lands±
All Rights Included±
Rights Not Included
Same Builder as Subject
Additional row±

Project Information

Project Name | Same Project as Subject
Monthly Fee
Common Amenities/Services
Special Assessments

Water Frontage with Private Access

Water Frontage
Permanent Waterfront Feature
Right to Build
Total Linear Measurement

Dwelling(s)

Year Built±
Structure Design±
Gross Building Finished Area±
Noncontinuous Finished Area±
Townhouse End Unit±
Townhouse Back to Back±
Townhouse Location±
Construction Method±
Manufactured Home Width±
Dwelling Style±
Total Dwelling Volume±
Window Surface Area±
Functional Issues±
Disaster Mitigation±
Heating±
Cooling±
Additional row±

Energy Efficient and Green Features

Renewable Energy Component
Building Certification
Efficiency Rating

Unit(s)

Structure ID | Unit ID
Location of ADU±
Floor Number±
Corner Unit±
Levels in Unit±
Bedrooms±
Baths, Full | Half±
Finished Area Above Grade±
Finished Area Above Grade (Nonstandard)±
Unfinished Area Above Grade±
Finished Area Below Grade±
Finished Area Below Grade (Nonstandard)±
Unfinished Area Below Grade±
Features for Individuals w/ Disabilities±
Additional row±

Quality and Condition

ExteriorStructure ID
ExteriorQuality
ExteriorExterior Walls and Trim
ExteriorFoundation
ExteriorRoof
ExteriorWindows
ExteriorOther Exterior Feature
ExteriorCondition
ExteriorExterior Walls and Trim
ExteriorFoundation
ExteriorRoof
ExteriorWindows
ExteriorOther Exterior Feature
InteriorStructure ID | Unit ID
InteriorQuality
InteriorKitchen
InteriorOverall Bathrooms
InteriorOverall Flooring
InteriorWalls and Ceiling
InteriorOther Interior Feature
InteriorCondition
InteriorKitchen
InteriorOverall Bathrooms
InteriorOverall Flooring
InteriorWalls and Ceiling
InteriorOther Interior Feature
ADU interiorLocation of ADU
ADU interiorQuality
ADU interiorKitchen
ADU interiorOverall Bathrooms
ADU interiorOverall Flooring
ADU interiorWalls and Ceiling
ADU interiorOther Interior Feature
ADU interiorCondition
ADU interiorKitchen
ADU interiorOverall Bathrooms
ADU interiorOverall Flooring
ADU interiorWalls and Ceiling
ADU interiorOther Interior Feature
OverallQuality±
OverallCondition±

Property Amenities

Outdoor Accessories±
Outdoor Living±
Water Features±
Whole Home±
Miscellaneous±

Vehicle Storage

Type | Spaces | Detail±
Additional row

Outbuilding

Outbuilding Type±
Gross Building Area
Finished Area
Unfinished Area
Structure Volume
Baths, Full
Baths - Half
Kitchens
Heating
Cooling
Utilities
Additional row

Summary

List Price
Contract Price
Sale Price
Net Adjustment Total
Adjusted Price Per Unit
Adjusted Price Per Bedroom
Price Per Gross Building Finished Area
Price Per Finished Area Above Grade
Adjusted Price
Comparable Weight

The same street at dusk, porch lights and windows lit, the ridge dark against a deep blue sky. — A comparable’s price was set on its contract date. The appraisal is as of a later day.AI-generated illustration

02 / Time adjustmentsThe Contract Date row

The time adjustment now sits on the Contract Date row

The legacy grid had one row, Date of Sale/Time. The URAR splits it into Contract Date (22.01.30) and Sale Date, and the market-change adjustment goes on the Contract Date row. F-1’s note is direct: “If Contract Date is known, use this row to make time adjustments based on changes in the market.”¹ A pending comparable has a contract date too, so it gets the same treatment as a closed sale.

Fannie Mae’s policy asks the appraiser to determine whether market conditions changed “from the time the comparable went under contract to the effective date of the appraisal report.” Support can come from home price indices, statistical analysis, modeling or paired sales, and the report “must, at a minimum, summarize the supporting evidence and include a description of the data sources, tool(s), and technique(s) used.” If the contract date is unavailable, the appraiser enters unknown.⁷

SF1 grid General Information: contract dates 07/22/2019, 08/05/2019 and 07/02/2019 for the three comparables, each with a $0 adjustment, against the subject's 09/17/2019 contract. — **SF1: three $0 adjustments.** Contracts 46 to 80 days before the 09/20/2019 effective date. Source: SF1 v1.4, PDF p. 14.³

Scenario 2 grid General Information: contract dates 03/26/2023, 12/22/2022 and 02/25/2023 with adjustments of $10,000, $30,000 and $15,000. — **Scenario 2: $10,000, $30,000, $15,000.** The reconciliation says “approximately 1% per month for each comparable.” Source: 2- to 4-unit Scenario 2 v1.2, PDF pp. 16 to 17.⁴

Fannie Mae also publishes a one-page illustration of the logic. Over 12 months the market rose 7%. A comparable whose contract captured 5% of that rise is adjusted up 2%; one that captured 8% is adjusted down 1%; one at 7% gets no adjustment.⁸ The adjustment is the market change the comparable’s price did not yet reflect.

Time-adjustment calculator

Move the market and watch each comparable’s adjustment

Market change per month 1.0%

Effective date 05/01/2023. Each adjustment is price × rate × months from contract date, rounded to $1,000. At 1.0% the calculator gives $10,000, $32,000 and $17,000. The report shows $10,000, $30,000 and $15,000, about 0.9% to 1.0% a month, which its reconciliation describes as “approximately 1% per month.”

Scenario 2 time adjustments at the selected rate
Comp	Contract	Days	Sale price	At this rate	In the report
1	03/26/2023	36	$850,000	$10,000	$10,000
2	12/22/2022	130	$750,000	$32,000	$30,000
3	02/25/2023	65	$780,000	$17,000	$15,000

Sources: 2- to 4-unit Scenario 2 v1.2, PDF pp. 16 to 17;⁴ Fannie Mae, Market Condition Adjustments, 5.22.25.⁸ A teaching tool that restates published arithmetic, not a market model.

Nine comparables, three sample reportsDays from contract date to effective date, and the time adjustment as a share of sale price. Filled points carry an adjustment; open points are $0. The dashed line is 1% per month.

Scenario 2
SF1
MH1

Sources: SF1 v1.4 p. 14; 2- to 4-unit Scenario 2 v1.2 p. 16; MH1 v1.4 p. 21.^3,4 These are the sample set’s published examples, not a market sample.

Data table

Contract age and time adjustment
Sample, comparable	Days	Adjustment	Share of price
SF1 1	60	$0	0.0%
SF1 2	46	$0	0.0%
SF1 3	80	$0	0.0%
Scenario 2 1	36	$10,000	1.2%
Scenario 2 2	130	$30,000	4.0%
Scenario 2 3	65	$15,000	1.9%
MH1 1	116	$0	0.0%
MH1 2	112	$0	0.0%
MH1 3	544	$5,000	1.4%

MH1 carries $0 on two comparables with contracts 112 and 116 days old; that can be right in a flat market, and the policy treats a zero adjustment as a conclusion that needs the same market support as any other. MH1’s third comparable, a short sale with a contract 544 days old, carries $5,000, about 1.4%.^3,7

03 / Site and ViewFor every comparable

Location becomes Site Influence, and View gets a list for every comparable

The legacy Location row held a short coded entry. The URAR replaces it with Site Influence (Location), a multi-select list that always displays and can be adjusted for every comparable. View | Range always displays too, with a view type and a range of Full, Partial, Seasonal or Other.¹ The subject’s impact rating for view and influence lives in the Site section, which the series covers in Part 2.

Blank URAR grid Site rows from Appendix C-1, including Site Influence (Location), Apparent Environmental Conditions and View | Range with adjustment columns for each comparable. — The Site rows of the grid. Source: Appendix C-1, URAR layout v1.3, p. 26.⁶

View 28 named values, plus Other

Bay
Canal
City Street
Commercial
Cove
Creek
Golf Course
Gulf
High Density Residential
Highway
Industrial
Lake
Marsh
Mountain
Ocean
Park
Parking Lot
Pastoral
Pond
Reservoir
Residential
River
School
Skyline
Sound
Traffic Wall Barriers
Valley
Woods

Apparent Environmental Conditions 9 named values, plus None and Other

Hazardous Above Ground Storage Tank
Hazardous Substances
Landfill
Radon
Slush Pit
Soil Contamination
Superfund Site
Underground Storage Tank
Water Contamination

Source: UAD 3.6 schema, enumerated types v1.3 (SiteInfluenceBase, ViewBase, EnvironmentalConditionBase).⁹

04 / Comparable WeightMost, Less, No Weight

Comparable Weight puts the appraiser’s reliance on each sale in a field

Comparable Weight (22.15.14) always displays and is required for every comparable. It has three answers. Most: the comparable was given more or most emphasis. Less: less emphasis than those weighted Most. No Weight: included but given no weight, for example a model match that was not a typical market transaction.¹ Fannie Mae’s policy uses the same three words: the appraiser’s comments must “identify why the sale(s) were given the most weight, less weight, or no weight.”⁷

F-1 adds a guardrail. A property considered only to show a special feature, and never put in the grid, does not get No Weight. It goes in Additional Properties Analyzed Not Used, the subject of chapter 05.¹

Field lift: SF1’s weights

Three comparables, three weights

SF1 grid Summary: adjusted prices $490,760, $490,540 and $534,400, Comparable Weight Most, Most and Less, indicated value $491,000, the reconciliation text explaining that Comp 3 was in a different subdivision, and five additional properties analyzed not used. — GSE sample SF1, v1.4, PDF p. 15.³

SF1 comparables, weight and the reason given
Comp	Adjusted price	22.15.14
1	$490,760	Most
2	$490,540	Most
3	$534,400	Less

“Comps 1 and 2 were from the same neighborhood as the Subject. Comp 3 not given as much weight because of different subdivision.”
Reconciliation of Sales Comparison Approach (22.16.01)

SF1 is a consistent file: two Most, one Less, and a sentence that says why. The GSEs’ Lessons Learned job aid shows the failure the field exposes. Its example grid reports Most, Less and Less, and the reconciliation reads, in canned UAD 2.6 language, that the value “HAS BEEN WEIGHTED EQUALLY AMONG COMPARABLE SALES 1-3.”¹⁰

Lessons Learned example: a grid Summary with Comparable Weight Most, Less and Less circled, above a reconciliation sentence highlighted in yellow stating the value was weighted equally among comparable sales 1 to 3. — **Non-compliant, per the GSEs.** The grid and the sentence disagree. Source: UAD 3.6 Job Aid, Lessons Learned, June 23, 2026, p. 14.¹⁰

05 / Comps not usedAdditional Properties Analyzed Not Used

The properties the appraiser looked at and set aside now have a table

Additional Properties Analyzed Not Used has no legacy counterpart. Each row records an address, a sale date where there is one, a status, a Reason Not Used from an 18-answer list, and a required Comment. Land sales are excluded. The table displays when relevant, “initially, for the appraiser to provide additional context, or as part of any reconsideration process.”¹

The street of houses with the three nearest in focus and the farther houses softly blurred.

AI-generated illustration

SF1: five properties analyzed, not used

1
101 Somewhere LnActive
Inferior quality and non-similar location
- Proximity
- Quality
2
955 Black Swan RdPending
Superior quality and located further from subject
- Proximity
- Quality
3
325 Summit CtSettled Sale, 08/21/2019
Located further from subject
- Proximity
4
7464 Blank LnSettled Sale, 06/02/2019
Had 5 bedrooms, but because it was larger and farther away, it was not used.
- Finished Area
- Proximity
5
8718 Mover LnSettled Sale, 07/13/2019
Property has a media room and wet bar, but is larger and of superior quality.
- Finished Area
- Quality

Accessory Dwelling UnitAgeAmenitiesArea Below GradeBathroom CountBedroom CountConditionDated SaleDesign or Style VarianceFinished Area2Gross Building AreaLot SizeOutbuildingsProximity4Quality3Sale or Transfer TypeSite InfluenceOther (Describe)

Rows from GSE sample SF1, v1.4, PDF p. 15;³ the 18 Reason Not Used answers from Appendix F-1 v1.4, p. 281.¹

SF1’s reconciliation ties the table back to the grid: sales with five bedrooms, a media room and a wet bar were in the competitive market area, “exhibited in #4 and 5 of the Additional Properties Analyzed Not Used, but were not as comparable since they were larger, farther away, and superior quality.”³ A reviewer who wonders why those sales are missing can read the answer in the file.

The table matters for reconsideration of value as well. When a borrower or lender submits alternative sales, F-1 lets them appear here with the appraiser’s reason. Our reconsideration of value feature covers that process.

06 / Price per unit2 to 4 units, and the range rule

A four-unit grid reports price per unit, and the value must sit inside the adjusted range

The grid has no row that adjusts for a difference in unit count. Gross Building Finished Area, the combined area of all units, displays when the subject has more than one unit, and the Summary calculates Adjusted Price Per Unit (22.15.09): the comparable’s adjusted price divided by its units excluding ADUs.¹ For small multifamily collateral that is a per-unit figure on every comparable, without recomputing it from area and bedroom counts.

A two-story fourplex with four entry doors and an exterior stair on a suburban collector road. — AI-generated illustration of a fictional fourplex

Adjusted Price Per Unit, Scenario 2Four-unit comparables, with each one’s Comparable Weight. Axis starts at $190,000.

Comparable 1 Less
$198,850
Comparable 2 Less
$193,100
Comparable 3 Most
$196,100

Source: 2- to 4-unit Scenario 2 v1.2, PDF p. 17.⁴

Fannie Mae’s policy adds a check that the grid makes easy: “the indicated value in the Sales Comparison Approach must be within the range of the adjusted sales price of the comparables.”⁷ Both samples pass, and the figure shows by how much.

Indicated value against the adjusted rangeBar: lowest to highest adjusted price. Marker: indicated value. Ticks: each comparable, labeled with its weight.

SF1

123$491,000

$490,540 to $534,400

Scenario 2

123$785,000

$772,400 to $795,400

Sources: SF1 v1.4 p. 15; Scenario 2 v1.2 p. 17.^3,4

Scenario 2 shows the pieces working together. Comparable 1 sold for the most, $850,000, and still ends lowest-but-one after a net adjustment of −$54,600. The appraiser placed Most weight on Comparable 3, “which best reflects the subject property,” and its per-unit figure sits between the other two. The indicated value, $785,000, is within $600 of Comparable 3’s adjusted price.⁴

07 / Risk lensRules, screens and limits

What a collateral team can test in this grid, and where the data stops

Each check below reads fields the grid now carries. None of them needs a reviewer to reconstruct the appraiser’s reasoning from an addendum first.

FOR EACH comparable:
  IF Comparable Weight (22.15.14) = "Most"
     AND Reconciliation of SCA (22.16.01) does not name it
  THEN flag "weight not explained"

  IF Listing Status IN ("Pending", "Settled Sale")
     AND days from Contract Date (22.01.30) to effective date > 90
     AND Contract Date adjustment = 0
     AND 22.16.01 names no technique (HPI, paired sales, model)
  THEN flag "zero time adjustment without support"

  IF Comparable Weight = "No Weight"
     AND the same address appears in Additional Properties
         Analyzed Not Used (22.17.02)
  THEN flag "listed twice"

FOR EACH additional property analyzed not used:
  IF Reason Not Used (22.17.05) = "Other (Describe)"
     AND Comment (22.17.06) is shorter than your minimum
  THEN flag "reason not explained"

IF Indicated Value (22.15.15) is outside the range of
   Adjusted Price (22.15.13) across the comparables
THEN flag "outside adjusted range"   (SB4-1.3-09)

Field IDs from Appendix F-1 v1.4, chapter 22.¹ The range rule restates SB4-1.3-09.⁷ The thresholds are a lender’s choice; they are not GSE rules.

Where the data stops

Weight is self-reported. Comparable Weight comes from the same appraiser whose adjustments it describes. It exposes a contradiction between the weights and the commentary; it cannot show that the weighting was sound.
Reason codes can be thin. Other (Describe) and a technically accurate but uninformative reason both pass. The Comment field is where the explanation lives, and it is free text.
Contract dates come from the appraiser’s sources. F-1 allows Contract Date Unknown, and nothing in the report checks a date against an independent record.
Exact-looking numbers inherit their inputs. Adjusted Price Per Unit and a time adjustment are calculations on reported prices and dates, and carry any error in them.
Automated suggestions still need documentation. If a model proposes a time adjustment, SB4-1.3-09 still requires the report to describe the data sources, tools and technique. Collateral teams should keep any model output they use for review separate from requests to the appraiser about value.⁷

08 / Review checklistFor the next file

Six checks for the next sales grid you review

Sales grid review

0 of 6 checked

01Does each comparable weighted Most appear by name in the Reconciliation of Sales Comparison Approach?
02Does every comparable with a contract more than about 90 days before the effective date carry a time adjustment, or a stated reason for none?
03When a time adjustment is applied, does the report name its data sources, tools and technique, as SB4-1.3-09 requires?
04Is Additional Properties Analyzed Not Used populated, and does each Comment explain its Reason Not Used?
05Does the indicated value fall inside the range of adjusted prices?
06For 2 to 4 units, are the Adjusted Price Per Unit figures close to each other, and is the Most-weighted comparable inside that cluster?

Saved in this browser only.

One gap remains open. The grid records the appraiser’s contract dates, weights and reasons in a form a machine can read, and nothing in UAD 3.6 checks those entries against an independent transaction record. A lender that wants that check has to build it, for example by matching contract and sale dates to MLS or public-record data it already licenses.

Research checked Oct. 17, 2026 against the GSE documents listed below. Row counts were made by ValuSignal from the Summary of Rows workbook; day counts and percentages are calculated from the sample reports’ dates and prices. The street, houses and fourplex are fictional and were generated with Higgsfield; the form pages and sample grids are screenshots of GSE publications. General information, not legal, lending or appraisal advice.

Sources

10 documents, accessed Oct. 16 to 17, 2026

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Appendix F-1: URAR Reference Guide, v1.4, chapter 22March 10, 2026
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Appendix F-1 Supplement: Summary of Rows in Comparable Grids, v1.3, sheet "Sales Comp Grid"In the F-1 package
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Appendix D-1: URAR Sample Scenarios and XML Files, SF1 and MH1 sample reports, v1.4March 10, 2026
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Appendix D-1: 2- to 4-unit Scenario 2 sample report, v1.2In the D-1 package
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, UAD Specification Appendix C: Form 1004/70 with numbered fieldsForm dated March 2005
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Appendix C-1: URAR layout, v1.3Current package
Fannie Mae, Selling Guide Supplement: UAD 3.6 Policy, SB4-1.3-08 and SB4-1.3-09Sept. 2, 2026
Fannie Mae, Market Condition Adjustments (illustration linked from Selling Guide B4-1.3-09)May 22, 2025
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, UAD 3.6 schema, enumerated types v1.3Current package
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, UAD 3.6 Job Aid: Guidance for Appraisers through Lessons Learned, v1.0June 23, 2026

The Signal / Monthly briefing

Follow the UAD 3.6 series as each part publishes.

One sourced briefing in the first week of each month on valuation policy, collateral risk and property technology.

Unsubscribe in one click. We don't sell your email or share it with sponsors. Privacy Policy

Found this useful? Share it

LinkedIn Facebook Email