What’s Driving Super-Sized Credit Union Mergers?

That included the largest deal measured: Rivermark Community Credit Union’s acquisition of Advantis Credit Union of Oregon City in 2024’s fourth quarter. Advantis ended the third quarter with $1.9 billion in assets and 87,669 members.

Rivermark Community had $1.6 billion in assets and 92,526 members as of September 2024, and $3.2 billion in assets and 172,439 members as of September 2025.

That means that in the year since the merger, Rivermark Community has shed $329 million in assets and 7,756 members.

The data from the previous chart suggests that a factor in volume growth has been the size of the targets.

This graph shows that trend. The average size of credit unions in 2023 was $60 million, while the averages were $78 million in 2024 and $74 in the first half of this year.

This year’s first half had 73 deals, 20% fewer than 2024’s second half, but on par with the other periods shown.

Expect the second half of 2025 to be huge because the period will include the final results of three multi-billion-dollar credit union targets:

• UNIFY Financial Federal Credit Union of Allen, Texas, 30 miles north of Dallas ($3.4 billion in assets, 241,455 members) acquired CommunityAmerica Credit Union of Lenexa, Kan. ($5.4 billion in assets, 380,564 members) in a merger that closed Nov. 1. The surviving charter is UNIFY’s, but the headquarters remains in Lenexa and CommunityAmerica CEO Lisa Ginter is CEO of the new organization.
• Digital Federal Credit Union of Marlborough, Mass. ($12.9 billion in assets, 1.2 million members) will complete its acquisition of First Tech Federal Credit Union of San Jose, Calif. ($16.9 billion in assets, 712,057 members) Jan. 1.
• Ent Credit Union of Colorado Springs, Colo. ($9.7 billion in assets, 581,730 members) will complete its acquisition of Wings Financial Credit Union of Minneapolis-Saint Paul ($9.4 billion in assets, 381,281 members) Jan. 1.

Targets are generally financially weaker than other credit unions.

The easiest (but imperfect) way to measure that is by simple net worth ratios. This chart shows that even in better periods the ratios of targets has lagged the movement average.

Take the second half of 2024 as an example. Recall that it had five credit unions with assets of $506 million to $1.9 billion. Those five credit unions also had a combined net worth ratio of 11.4% – 21 bps higher than the movement average.

The final year-to-date ROA annualized of the targets over the last 30 months shows a range from -0.07% in the fourth quarters of 2023 and 2024 to -2.28% in 2025’s first quarter. Those (also imperfect) target numbers were 49 to 295 basis points than the movement average for those quarters.

So why are these credit unions throwing in the towel?

That is a great question, and one that’s not easily answered given the lack of consistent transparency in credit union mergers.

Sometimes a credit union reaches its sell-by date. Our team has experience with at least one tiny credit union that served employees of a newspaper well before the newspaper shriveled up about 20 years ago, which led to the credit union choosing to be acquired through a merger.
However, sometimes a CEO might be looking for a finder’s fee or severance bonus. Sometimes it’s not clear what benefit is accrued to members.
Going through articles by CU Times reporter Peter Strozniak, who regularly covers mergers, we tallied the reasons cited by the NCUA as reasons for mergers for the 429 targets.

The most common reason was the ability to provide “expanded services” to members. That was the reason given for 312 credit unions, or 73% of the targets.

“Inability to recruit officials” was the reason for 35 targets (8%) and some form of poor business conditions was the reason given for 70 targets (16%).

Q&A

Mergers present many hurdles for credit unions to clear – one being the task of combining member data from the two merging institutions into a single system. We recently asked Kris Bishop, Founder and CEO of FIntegrate Technology, a Birmingham, Ala.-based provider of solutions that automate and simplify collections, recoveries and transaction disputes for financial institutions, to share his best practices for credit union member data migration during a merger.

CU Times: What are the biggest challenges credit unions face when migrating member data as the result of a merger?

As mergers become larger and more strategic, the operational challenges expand, none more complicated than the migration of member data. Merging institutions often bring decades of records, legacy archives, imaging systems and disparate databases. Bringing that information together cleanly and accurately is one of the most difficult steps in completing a merger.

The first challenge is data consistency. Different credit unions maintain data using varying core systems, naming conventions, fields and indexing formats, and historical retention practices. Reconciling inconsistent data structures requires deep analysis before any migration can begin. Without proper normalization, member profiles and their historical images and data can merge incorrectly, creating compliance and servicing risks.

Another challenge is data quality. Smaller credit unions, many of which are considering mergers due to rising operational pressure, higher interest rates and technology investment demands, may carry older systems or outdated record-keeping processes. When two institutions come together, missing fields, inconsistent document scans and unindexed historical archives can complicate the creation of a unified member profile.
Volume adds another layer of complexity. Today’s mergers involve larger institutions with deeper histories. That means more loans, more share accounts, more archived images and more documents that must remain accessible for audits, servicing and regulatory expectations. Even credit unions that decide not to convert all historical data must ensure secure, reliable access to what remains.

Merger-driven data migration also introduces operational strain. Staff who already face growing workloads, including collections, which have become a major pressure point for many CEOs, must simultaneously support a complex integration. This becomes even more challenging during periods of core consolidation, as institutions facing system sunsets or platform modernization must manage multiple large-scale transitions at once.

Finally, member experience is a critical concern. Any inaccuracies in data mapping, gaps in historical records or delays in migrating essential information can affect everything from online banking access to loan servicing. Maintaining trust requires a migration process that is invisible to members, which demands meticulous planning and the right technical capabilities.

Ultimately, the rise of larger, more strategic credit union mergers has brought data migration to the center of integration planning. It is a foundational component of delivering a seamless experience after the merger closes.

CU Times: What types of tools are available to credit unions, such as automation, that can assist them with a smooth data migration post-merger, and how do they work?

Bishop: As merger activity accelerates, driven by rising operating pressures, digital-transformation needs and succession challenges, credit unions increasingly rely on technology to simplify the most complex aspect of integration: Migrating and modernizing member data. The good news is that today’s tools offer more precision, automation and flexibility than ever before, helping institutions merge data without sacrificing accuracy.

The first category of tools includes automated data-mapping platforms. These systems analyze both institutions’ data structures, identify discrepancies and automatically map fields, data and images to the proper format, member and accounts in the destination system. Automation dramatically reduces the manual effort required to normalize data and helps prevent errors that could affect member accounts or compliance. Advanced platforms can also flag anomalies, such as duplicate profiles, missing images or indexes, or conflicting records, long before they become problems during conversion.

Another important toolset involves legacy data conversion and archival solutions. Credit unions rarely convert every historical document or image into a new system because doing so would be costly and time-consuming, especially as mergers involve institutions with larger and more complex archives.

Modern conversion platforms offer three strategic options:

• Full migration of historical data into the go-forward system;
• Hybrid migration, where only recent or high-value data moves forward; and
• Browser-based archives, which securely store older data in a searchable, read-only environment without reindexing.

These approaches give credit unions flexibility to control both cost and access needs, ensuring staff maintain audit-ready visibility into past transactions even when systems are retired.

Automation-driven quality-assurance tools also play a significant role. These solutions scan data for inconsistencies, validate formats and conduct pre-conversion testing. They help credit unions catch issues, such as mismatched loan numbers or missing signatures, before data is migrated, drastically reducing the risk of post-merger servicing errors.

Another emerging category includes integration orchestration platforms that streamline communication between disparate systems during the merger. These tools enable secure data transfers, track progress across multiple workstreams and ensure that both institutions are aligned on timing, dependencies and testing results. For mergers that coincide with broader system changes, such as industry-wide core consolidation efforts, orchestration platforms help institutions manage several transitions simultaneously.

Finally, member-facing continuity tools help protect the experience during migration. These may include temporary data-bridging systems, enhanced authentication workflows and automated updates that keep online and mobile banking experiences synchronized across systems until the conversion is complete.

Collectively, these tools allow credit unions to enter mergers with confidence. By blending automation, flexible archival strategies and strong orchestration, institutions can account for rising merger complexity while delivering a smooth transition for members and employees alike.