Walk into a major bank branch today and the odds are you will find a smaller space, fewer staff and, quite often, nobody who can write you a home loan. That is the quiet backdrop to one of the biggest shifts in how Australians borrow.
The pattern is stark. Official prudential data shows the five largest lenders ran 1,805 branches at 30 June 2026, down from 3,575 in June 2017. That is 1,770 fewer doors, a cut of 49.5%. Their ATM fleets shrank even faster, by 59.7%, from 10,283 to 4,146. Bank branch closures are not a side story to the mortgage market. They sit right next to its biggest structural change.
Branches down, brokers up
Across all lenders, the branch count fell from 5,485 in June 2018 to 3,108 by June 2026. Over a similar stretch, brokers’ share of new residential home loans climbed from 53.9% to a record 81.6%. In the latest quarter, $139.08 billion of loans settled through the channel.
The two trends move together, but that does not prove one caused the other. Banks have their own reasons to cut bricks and mortar: digital banking, cost pressure and changing customer habits. Still, the timing matters. As lenders pulled back from the high street, brokers filled the gap, and borrowers who once sat down with a bank lender now sit down with someone who can compare many lenders at once.
Who closed the most
The cuts were not even across the big four plus Macquarie.
- ANZ cut the steepest share of its network, 58.7%.
- Westpac closed 558 branches, or 54%, and lost 74% of its ATMs.
- CBA closed 487 branches.
- NAB closed 318.
- Macquarie never built a real branch network and sources over 95% of its home loans through brokers.
Macquarie is the useful case study. It shows where the whole market is heading if branches keep thinning out: a lender that is effectively a broker-fed product shelf.
The regional picture
Regional and remote branches already fell 38.6%, from 2,335 to 1,434. The pace of closures has eased sharply, with just 35 among the big five in the latest year. Part of that is a pledge made in February 2025 by four majors not to shut regional branches before 31 July 2027.
That pledge has an end date. It is worth watching what happens once it lapses.
A Gippsland broker reports that the branches which survive often have no lender on site, which nudges some regional customers who dislike video calls towards a broker instead. That is a useful ground-level detail. It suggests the broker is not just winning on price or choice. For some borrowers, the broker is the only person left to talk to face to face.
Key numbers
- Big five branches: 3,575 (June 2017) to 1,805 (June 2026), down 49.5%
- Big five ATMs: 10,283 to 4,146, down 59.7%
- Broker share of new home loans: 53.9% to a record 81.6%
- Regional and remote branches: 2,335 to 1,434, down 38.6%
Who benefits, and who pays
Brokers benefit most obviously. A shrinking branch network pushes more volume their way, and borrowers often get wider choice and help with paperwork.
But the shift has trade-offs that rarely make the headlines.
First, concentration. When four in five loans come through one channel, a handful of aggregators and a small group of lenders sit at the centre of mortgage origination. Competition between lenders can look healthy while the route to market narrows.
Second, conflicts. Brokers are typically paid by lenders through commissions, so the incentives are not as neutral as a simple comparison service might suggest. Disclosure and best-interests rules exist for that reason, and they matter more as the channel grows. Our home loans, lenders and refinancing guide explains how to read the fees and trade-offs.
Third, who gets underserved. Borrowers with complex incomes, thin files or poor digital access can fall between the cracks if the bank branch was their main way in. Older customers and regional residents are the obvious groups to watch.
What could slow the trend
The closure rate has already cooled. If the regional pledge holds and banks stop cutting, the branch count could stabilise. But the broker share is unlikely to reverse on its own. Habits have shifted, and lenders have built their funding and credit processes around broker volume.
A more realistic risk is that regulators start paying closer attention to how concentrated and conflicted origination has become. That would be a base-case possibility rather than a certainty, and the data here does not say it is coming.
What readers should take from this
If you are borrowing or refinancing, do not assume the broker’s first suggestion is the whole market. Ask how many lenders they compared, and how they are paid on the loan they recommend. If you prefer talking to someone in person, check whether your local branch actually has a lender on site before you make the trip.
Start here: ask any broker you use to show you at least two lender options side by side, with the commission disclosure.
If you want the weekly signal, subscribe to the free newsletter.
General info, not financial advice.
