Credit unions that issue credit cards are more apt to market tocollege-educated people, avoid assessing minimum finance chargesand embrace lower minimum payments, among other things, accordingto a new CFPB study.

The nearly 300-page study evaluated everything from card use tothe cost and availability of credit, as well as issuer practices.Here are four differences the CFPB highlighted regarding how credit unions, banks and subprime lenders run their cardprograms.

1. They’re more likely to pursue collegegraduates.

Using data from Mintel and Experian, the CFPB found that in 2013and 2014, subprime issuers sent more than half of their marketing mailings to households headed byconsumers with no college education.

“Although subprime issuers send much less mail volume thanlarger issuers, among issuers in our dataset, these smallerissuers’ share of all mailings sent to households headed byconsumers with no college education doubled from 2012 to 2014,” itnoted.

The CFPB also reported mass market issuers sent about 45% oftheir marketing mailings to those households in 2014.

Credit unions, however, sent slightly more than 30% of their mailings in 2014 to consumerswith no college education, according to the CFPB. That’s anincrease compared to 2013 but is still below 2012, when theproportion was about 35%, it reported.

2. Cardholder agreements tend to be shorter and morereadable.

The CFPB found cardholder agreements from mass market, subprimeand large credit union issuers have gotten slightly longer since2012. At just under 6,000 words in 2014, cardholder agreements fromcredit unions were about as long as those from mass market issuers,according to the report. However, at just under 10,000 words and insome cases almost 12,000 words long, cardholder agreements fromsubprime issuers were more than 70% longer than other agreements,it said.

Card agreements from credit unions and large issuers werereadable for high school graduates, but agreements fromsubprime specialists required college-level reading skills, it alsosaid. That makes those marketing mailings problematic, the CFPBclaimed.

“The most complex, difficult-to-read agreements aredisproportionately marketed to consumers who may be the leastequipped to comprehend and navigate them,” it said.

3. Credit unions shun minimum financecharges.

In its examination of cardholder agreements, the CFPB also foundthat large and subprime issuers generally assess minimum financecharges. Credit unions, however, largely do not. Of those issuersthat assess the charge, the range was $0.50 to $2.

“Private-label cards tended to have charges at the upper end ofthe range,” it reported. “General purpose cards were mostly at theother end. Subprime specialist issuers universally set the minimumfinance charge at $1.”

4. Credit unions lean toward more minimal minimumpayments.

Of the contractually specified practices it examined, minimumpayment formulas varied most, the CFPB said.

Credit unions and subprime banks tend to use a percentage oftotal statement balance including finance charges; large issuersoverwhelmingly use a percentage of total statement balanceexcluding finance changes and then add the finance charge to theminimum payment due, it explained. Unlike large issuers and mostsubprime banks, most credit unions didn’t specify that penalties orlate fees must be paid in the minimum payment, it added.

“Among issuers that calculate the minimum payment as a share oftotal new balances including capitalized finance charges, creditunions universally require minimum payments of 2% of the totalbalances,” it said.

Subprime banks required 5% to 7% minimum payments in thatsample; the one large bank that used the method charged 3% andsometimes 4% of the total balance, it reported.

Almost all issuers set floors on minimum payments; the mostcommon was $25. Subprime issuers tended to set higher floors andcredit unions generally set lower ones, the CFPB said.