Aloft Appraiser Toolkit

[djd09]

And there you have it: the revolving door.

now i'll relay this little bit...happens more than i'd like to admit...late at night, she knocks on my door....drunk again and looking to score...now i know i should say no but...it's kind of hard when she's ready to go...i may be dumb but i'm not a dweeb...i'm just a sucker with no self-esteem

when she's saying, oh that she want's only me...then i wonder why she sleeps with my friends...when she's saying, oh that i'm like a disease...then i wonder how much more i can spend...well i guess i should stick up for myself...but I really think it's better this way...the more you suffer...the more it shows you really care...Right?

 

[Tim Hicks (Texas)]

I tried Aloft and watched their videos. I think it is garbage. Assigning quality by purely pulling numbers out the air (3.2, 3.4, this one was probably a little better so 3.6...shouldn't the better property be 3.2 since Q2 is better than Q3?). How did that pass muster with the GSE's? Isn't this type of decision making that the GSE's are down on the appraisers for now? Like all statistical data it can be manipulated to meet whatever criteria you want at the moment. Depreciated cost does not always translate to the real world with functional obsolescence and varying cost factors. Depreciated cost will never be as good as sensitivity analysis. Adjustment support data is only good for cookie cutter land. Don't we wish we all worked in cookie cutter land? Then there would be no blowback on market analysis.

I have been using True Tracts for a couple of months for the monthly market trends. Sometimes it widens the adjusted value range. Even with three model matches and no adjustments needed. Why? Because the market is imperfect. Some things sell for less than it should and some things sell for more than it should.

So, use these tools and if they are not supported by market data, just explain why. But keep using those tools because that is what we are pushing this year.

All these new programs are trying to mold appraisers into quasi-AVMs. If AVMs were so great, why would they ever need appraisers? Big data does not factor into every submarket because quality, condition and real world market reaction on all the property features is different in every submarket.

Oh well, that is my opinion for what little it is worth.

 

[DWiley]

I tried Aloft and watched their videos. I think it is garbage. Assigning quality by purely pulling numbers out the air (3.2, 3.4, this one was probably a little better so 3.6...shouldn't the better property be 3.2 since Q2 is better than Q3?). How did that pass muster with the GSE's?

Who said that it did? I do not believe that you will find anything where the GSEs have endorsed that tool, or any tool.

It is up to the appraiser to test these tools and see how they really work. As I said before, I have looked at many appraiser tools, and there are some that I simply would not use because they do not employ recognized methods correctly, at least not according to my textbooks.

 

[DWiley]

There are hundreds of experienced appraisal educators, including those with a deep background in valuation theory, market modeling, and regulatory compliance. But instead of choosing a neutral, well-established source grounded in analytical rigor, they handed the mic to Aloft—a tech startup known more for automation, fast turnarounds, and software promotion than for actual valuation depth.

And? The new UAD course is just that - a course on UAD 3.6. It is not a course on how to develop an appraisal. Such material was intentionally avoided.

 

[Mejappz]

How did that pass muster with the GSE's?

Heather Sullivan.

 

[chad hampton]

Quid pro quo. It’s the foundation of any profession that claims to be based on ethics.

 

[DWiley]

Heather Sullivan.

Still waiting for you to cite anything where either GSE has endorsed, approved or recommended any specific adjustment/appraisal tool

 

[Mejappz]

Still waiting for you to cite anything where either GSE has endorsed, approved or recommended any specific adjustment/appraisal tool

I have given you plenty of citations you just refuse to accept them just like you refused to accept the Bradley’s collusion with McKissock which was proven to be correct.

 

[DWiley]

I have given you plenty of citations you just refuse to accept them just like you refused to accept the Bradley’s collusion with McKissock which was proven to be correct.

The citations you provided are related to the training material. I asked for a citation related to the adjustment tool. What you refuse to accept is that those are two different things.

 

[Mejappz]

Still waiting for you to cite anything where either GSE has endorsed, approved or recommended any specific adjustment/appraisal tool

You’re moving the goalposts.


I never said Fannie or Freddie “endorsed” a specific tool. The concern is broader: when the GSEs write the curriculum (like the UAD 3.6 course), train the instructors, and select private partners like Aloft to deliver it—they control the message.


And when someone like Heather Sullivan, who developed training at Aloft (a company built around proprietary tools), moves into a policy role at Fannie Mae—it’s fair to question how much independence really exists between tech platforms, education, and regulation.


It’s not about naming a tool. It’s about how the profession is being steered—by the same institutions shaping the rules, the training, and, increasingly, the voices delivering both.