Much has been written about the importance of Hispanics to the housing market. But the ownership rate among Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders is even greater, according to the most detailed breakdown ever from the Census Bureau.

The homeownership rate among this group, collectively called AAPI, is 55.6 percent -- the second-highest in the country, behind non-Hispanic whites at 71.9 percent. By contrast, the ownership rate is 47 percent for Hispanics and 41.3 percent for African-Americans.

According to a report from the Asian Real Estate Association of America (AREAA), people in the AAPI group tend to have, on average, high credit scores, incomes and levels of educations. The group is projected to grow by 1.8 million households by 2024, and will buy 33 percent more houses than non-Hispanic whites.

Until last year, the U.S. Census lumped Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders together in the “other” category, along with Native Americans, Alaskans, Native Hawaiians and people who claimed two or more races. The addition of the AAPI category will allow for more accurate and useful demographic research in the future.

Of all the key market indicators, few are more useful for sellers than the number of times their house has been shown to would-be buyers over the preceding two weeks. If no one’s come a-calling, there’s something terribly wrong.

The number of viewings will always vary, based on market conditions, the season, price range and proximity to the center of the region’s market. For example, you can’t expect as many visitors in a slow market, but you should expect lots in places where there is little inventory to compete against.

All things considered, Virginia broker David Rathgeber’s rule of thumb is two weeks: “If no one came to see your home in the last two weeks, you are in trouble,” he says.

Typically, it means that the house has been priced poorly. “No matter what the market conditions are, homes that are priced well, and show well, will sell,” says Beth Atalay, broker-owner of Florida’s Cam Realty. “No gimmicks needed -- you don’t need to offer bonuses to selling agents, don’t need to use marketing techniques that don’t work for all. If you need your home to sell, do not overprice it!”

Rathgeber suggests taking a hard look at the houses that have sold recently in your market. If houses all around yours are selling, and you’ve had no bites in the last couple weeks, it’s time to consider a price reduction.

Otherwise, look for the answer to your woes somewhere in the MLS printout of your listing. There could be a mistake in there somewhere, so check it carefully. Does it list the wrong address, wrong directions, wrong square footage, wrong price? Check everything.

“There is no magic in selling a home,” says Rathgeber. “This is not rocket science, just attention to detail, and knowing which details need attention.”

Here’s a sobering point for anyone considering buying a brand-new house: It is highly likely it won’t be finished on time, and it possibly could contain a high number of defects.

The reason: Builders everywhere are saying that finding experienced construction workers is difficult at best.

The lack of labor is always at the top of the list of problems published by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). And a recent NAHB survey found that nearly 2 out of 3 builders say their biggest worry right now is labor.

The reason: Few young people want to be carpenters, plumbers or electricians, according to a poll of 18- to 25-year-olds by trade mag Builder.

The survey found that 4 out of 5 respondents know what field they want a career in, and it isn’t construction. Just 3 percent have an interest in the trades. Even if they could earn between $75,000 and $100,000 a year, 43 percent said “no dice” -- there is no amount of money that would make them give the trades a second thought.

With few desirable homes on the market in many places, it’s no secret that would-be buyers are bidding against each other, driving the selling price above what the seller originally asked.

But the lack of inventory also means houses are selling faster. In March, according to the Redfin brokerage chain, nearly 1 in every 5 houses sold went to contract within 14 days. In addition, more than 1 in 5 sold for more than the list price.

You’ve found the house you want. Now, where do you go for a mortgage?

If you’re buying a brand-spanking-new place, do you go with the builder’s in-house lender? After all, he’ll give you thousands in free upgrades. Or maybe his rate is a quarter-percent cheaper. His reason for being so magnanimous: He wants to keep your deal in-house so he can be on top of it and make sure everything goes according to Hoyle.

If you’re buying an existing house, do you go with the lender your real estate agent recommends? (Agents are supposed to recommend three lenders, actually.)

After all, your agent has just as much riding on your deal as you do. If it doesn’t close because you can’t get a mortgage or something falls through at the last minute, she doesn’t get paid. Experienced agents know who handles glitches the best and who gets loans to the settlement table with as few blips as possible.

Or do you listen to Mom and Dad’s advice? After all, they’ve probably done this a few times in their lives, so they should know what they are talking about. Shouldn’t they?

As it turns out, buyers who chose a lender because of financial incentives provided by their builders were only marginally satisfied with their experiences. That’s according to the National Borrower Satisfaction Index produced by the Stratmor Group, a Colorado-based consulting firm.

Those who listened to their realty agents were more satisfied, and those who paid heed to advice from their folks, a friend or another relative were even happier with their choices.

But the borrowers who were most fulfilled were those who made a connection of their own with their loan agent. Their antennae wiggled. They hit it off. He or she was personable, but also took the time to answer all their questions, listen to their concerns and work with them every step of the way.

In the Stratmor study, 31 percent of the huge 10,000-borrower sample chose their officer based on “loan officer interaction.” And that group reported a 95 out of 100 when asked about their overall “borrower satisfaction.”

“Their loan officers engaged with them and made them feel comfortable,” says the company’s senior partner, Garth Graham. It’s why he believes that loan officers -- also known as “humans” -- remain a central part of the loan process. And it’s why high-production officers are pretty highly paid.

That’s not a knock on online lending: Customers who chose a lender based on the company’s online tools reported a 93 satisfaction rating on Stratmor’s index. But those customers represent less than 1 percent of the sample. That tells Graham that while more borrowers are using the internet for their initial research, real people are “still critical” to the lending process.

It’s the connection between loan officers and borrowers that pays off. That’s why 78 percent of loan volume is produced by the top 40 originators -- not 40 companies, but 40 people, Graham says.

“Loan officers are still pretty darn important,” he says.

Meanwhile, a relatively high 19 percent of the sample gave “Realtor’s referral” as the primary reason for picking their lender. That group gave their deals a satisfaction score of 91 -- very good, but still substantially lower than the 95 rating of those who based their choice on their personal interactions.

Six percent of respondents said their choice was based on the lender’s reputation; that group reported a 95 satisfaction rating. The 11 percent who listened to a friend or relative were satisfied to the tune of 92 out of 100.

Of course, there are as many reasons to choose a lender as there are fingers on your hands. Those who took a lender’s offer because it could close on time gave their lenders a 94. When borrowers decided to go with the lender who had handled their previous mortgage, the satisfaction rate dipped to 87. Ditto for those who went with a lender because of a specific loan product.

Almost 4 percent went with the lender with the lowest rate, and 2 percent picked their lender because they had a previous banking relationship with the company. But their satisfaction ratings were just 90 and 88, respectively.

Rising mortgage rates might seem like nothing but bad news for those in the market to buy a home. But there may be a silver lining for consumers: When rates change in either direction, many lenders change their product lines.

Lenders typically offer two types of mortgages: a purchase-money mortgage, to be used to buy a home, and a refinance mortgage when rates decline. When rates go up, refinance transactions go down -- why would anyone refi into a higher rate? -- and lenders must replace that lost business.

One way lenders do that is by turning to what’s known as “alternative mortgage” products. And that can be to your benefit.

Today, there are several more products available that might better fit a borrower’s circumstances. And there may be more robust competition among lenders as they beg for your business.

At the recent regional conference of mortgage bankers in Atlantic City, New Jersey, several hundred lenders from the New England and Middle Atlantic states kicked the tires on several alternative products. Those included rehabilitation loans, affordable lending mortgages and so-called “Alt-A” loans -- ones which, for one reason or another, don’t fit into the bucket of products that can be purchased from primary lenders by the federal mortgage agencies (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae).

It’s worth noting that lenders maintain none of the new variety of alternative loans should be called “subprime,” at least not as they pertain to the poorly underwritten mortgages that exploded a decade ago, resulting in a foreclosure crisis that all but destroyed the national economy.

Today’s non-prime loans have to pass federal underwriting standards put into place to prevent another disaster, specifically the “ability to repay” rule mandated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Simply put, lenders must determine that borrowers have not just the desire to make their payments, but the ability to do so.

(Column intermission: It will be interesting to see if the “ability to repay” rule is swept away by a Trump administration that has little affinity for the CFPB or “unnecessary” regulations placed upon financial institutions.)

One segment of the market in which lenders are starting to exhibit more interest is one where borrowers put up a minimal amount of money out of pocket. These “3 percent down” programs have been around for some time. But with lenders salivating over easy-to-originate refis, they had little time to bother with these paperwork-intensive loans.

Now, with little to no refi business to speak of, they are turning to programs such as HomeReady and Home Possible from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, respectively.

Loans like these were designed to expand the mortgage market, especially for low- and moderate-income borrowers who have trouble scraping up enough money for a conventional down payment. In some cases, borrowers may even be able to use money from other sources to help defer the costs of closing charges and fees.

When Home Possible and HomeReady were rolled out almost two years ago, many lenders turned up their noses at them as just two more affordable-housing programs. But now that they are looking for ways to offset lost business, they have discovered the programs have some interesting bells and whistles.

For example, borrowers no longer need to be first-time homebuyers. But best of all, rates are lower than those that Fannie and Freddie charge on their top-tier mortgages.

Another product likely to see increased attention is the Federal Housing Administration’s 203(k) program, which allows the borrower to roll the cost of some home improvements into the mortgage, whether it be a purchase loan or refi.

With these loans, the cost of the improvements is advanced before they are made, and the contractor is paid from the loan proceeds. Consequently, the borrower does not need to take out two mortgages -- one likely at a far higher rate -- for the expenses.

The ideal customer for a 203(k) is an investor or wannabe homeowner with his or her eye on a clunker of a house, a fixer-upper, at a good price.

And then there’s the category of loans known as “non-Q” mortgages. These are loosely defined as loans to borrowers who pass the ability-to-pay test, but who have some characteristics -- poor credit scores, for example -- that make their loans ineligible for sale to Fannie, Freddie or Ginnie. These include jumbo loans that are above the maximum amount Fannie and Freddie can purchase, loans to investors who own more than 10 properties, loans to foreign nationals and loans to “challenged borrowers” who have suffered through a recent housing event such as a divorce, major illness or foreclosure.

In other cases, some lenders are starting to court investor-borrowers who fix and hold houses, as opposed to fix and flip. The borrower need not necessarily be an experienced investor, but could rather be a first-time property rehabber. The cost is a little higher and the loan has a shorter term. But once the borrower can exhibit a history of being a successful landlord, he or she can always refinance into a standard 30-year mortgage.

-- Freelance writer Mark Fogarty contributed to this report.