The cities pictured are the primary principal cities of the 50 largest US metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). I wanted to specifically look at prices in the “urban cores” of these regions. There’s only one principal city for each metro area included. So for example, the city of Dallas was used from the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington MSA.
Some notable highlights:
San Jose, San Francisco, and San Diego have the highest values at $1.46 million, $1.36 million, and $1 million, respectively, with SF being the only one with YoY gains.
Detroit and Cleveland have lowest values at $75,358 and $115,537, respectively. Both declining YoY, out of step with most of their Midwest peers that saw YoY gains.
ChrisKnight75 on
Someone needs to tell DCAD (the property appraisal agency for Dallas County). They just increased the appraised market value of my house 18% YoY. It’s capped at 10% by law, but still…
OrganizationLimp4017 on
Seems like all the popular places to move to during COVID have seen prices fall. Wonder if the migration to those areas has slowed thus weakening demand and/or those areas have been overbuilt in response to new residents thus increasing supply
Gamer_Grease on
Austin makes sense. They built a lot of housing and the tech boom has leveled off, at least in terms of high-paying employment. This is good news if you live there.
BadAdvice__Bot on
As someone that lives in Cincinnati, it is interesting that Cincinnati is up while Columbus, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh are down. I wonder what could be the difference.
bebopbrain on
Hartford CT is #1? It’s a crazy world.
Acceptable_Slice_325 on
Hell yeah, Austin! The amount of construction is crazy and aggravating and incredibly worth it.
turb0_encapsulator on
surprised to see San Diego so low. not sure if that’s YIMBYism delivering actual results or some local weakness in the economy.
Kolle12 on
Buffalo is surprising to me
PatchyWhiskers on
Wow tech bust hitting Austin hard.
WeldAE on
The other important thing to look at is WHY these numbers the way they were. Just search for the metros housing starts and look to get the FRED graph. For example, [Austin Metro](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AUST448BPPRIV) is seeing lower prices because they actually built houses. Notice how much higher they were in 2022 than in 2006. Now look at another metro like [Denver Metro](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DENV708BP1FH) and the graph is the exact opposite.
The reason they are both down is because most major metros have a frozen housing market. I’m in Atlanta and if I sold my house, which I have significant equity in and bought another house for exactly the same price, my mortgage would roughly double. That’s because the interest rates are almost double, and it costs 10% of the home price to sell and buy a house. Even those that are interested in buy, there is very little good housing on the market. In Atlanta the only healthy market is in the $1m to $1.5m category which represents like 8% of the market. That is because in this category a lot of sales are cash or largely cash because they are older wealthier buyers with lots of equity.
Varnu on
I’d like to point out that Austin is GROWING while the rent is falling dramatically. Housing is not, apparently, immune to supply and demand.
qxrt on
It was just a few years ago that San Jose was one of the hottest markets while San Francisco showed one of the steepest declines in housing prices, and now just a few years later it has flipped – seems like they’re just reverting to the mean and correcting for being overly hot/cold markets.
Fast-Penta on
Mostly red states on the lost value, mostly blue states on the increased value.
I think the combo of Trump being President and Roe v. Wade being repealed (less for the abortions, more for the OBGYNs) might be driving some migration.
RAF2018336 on
Real talk: who wants to move to Hartford CT?
openfolio_dave on
Could you do a variant color coded by region?
West cost, East Coast, South, Midwest.
Seems a lot of the south and west are dropping.
Is it getting too hot? (Seriously… Global warming)
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
16 Kommentare
Source: Zillow Research
Made in Google Sheets
The cities pictured are the primary principal cities of the 50 largest US metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). I wanted to specifically look at prices in the “urban cores” of these regions. There’s only one principal city for each metro area included. So for example, the city of Dallas was used from the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington MSA.
Some notable highlights:
San Jose, San Francisco, and San Diego have the highest values at $1.46 million, $1.36 million, and $1 million, respectively, with SF being the only one with YoY gains.
Detroit and Cleveland have lowest values at $75,358 and $115,537, respectively. Both declining YoY, out of step with most of their Midwest peers that saw YoY gains.
Someone needs to tell DCAD (the property appraisal agency for Dallas County). They just increased the appraised market value of my house 18% YoY. It’s capped at 10% by law, but still…
Seems like all the popular places to move to during COVID have seen prices fall. Wonder if the migration to those areas has slowed thus weakening demand and/or those areas have been overbuilt in response to new residents thus increasing supply
Austin makes sense. They built a lot of housing and the tech boom has leveled off, at least in terms of high-paying employment. This is good news if you live there.
As someone that lives in Cincinnati, it is interesting that Cincinnati is up while Columbus, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh are down. I wonder what could be the difference.
Hartford CT is #1? It’s a crazy world.
Hell yeah, Austin! The amount of construction is crazy and aggravating and incredibly worth it.
surprised to see San Diego so low. not sure if that’s YIMBYism delivering actual results or some local weakness in the economy.
Buffalo is surprising to me
Wow tech bust hitting Austin hard.
The other important thing to look at is WHY these numbers the way they were. Just search for the metros housing starts and look to get the FRED graph. For example, [Austin Metro](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AUST448BPPRIV) is seeing lower prices because they actually built houses. Notice how much higher they were in 2022 than in 2006. Now look at another metro like [Denver Metro](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DENV708BP1FH) and the graph is the exact opposite.
The reason they are both down is because most major metros have a frozen housing market. I’m in Atlanta and if I sold my house, which I have significant equity in and bought another house for exactly the same price, my mortgage would roughly double. That’s because the interest rates are almost double, and it costs 10% of the home price to sell and buy a house. Even those that are interested in buy, there is very little good housing on the market. In Atlanta the only healthy market is in the $1m to $1.5m category which represents like 8% of the market. That is because in this category a lot of sales are cash or largely cash because they are older wealthier buyers with lots of equity.
I’d like to point out that Austin is GROWING while the rent is falling dramatically. Housing is not, apparently, immune to supply and demand.
It was just a few years ago that San Jose was one of the hottest markets while San Francisco showed one of the steepest declines in housing prices, and now just a few years later it has flipped – seems like they’re just reverting to the mean and correcting for being overly hot/cold markets.
Mostly red states on the lost value, mostly blue states on the increased value.
I think the combo of Trump being President and Roe v. Wade being repealed (less for the abortions, more for the OBGYNs) might be driving some migration.
Real talk: who wants to move to Hartford CT?
Could you do a variant color coded by region?
West cost, East Coast, South, Midwest.
Seems a lot of the south and west are dropping.
Is it getting too hot? (Seriously… Global warming)