Connect with us

Home buyers may find less competition near city centers for the first time in years

Home buyers may find less competition near city centers for the first time in years
PR Newswire
SEATTLE, May 18, 2022

Suburbs are generally seeing home values grow more than urban areas, indicating more competition
Suburban home values have been gr…

Published

on

Home buyers may find less competition near city centers for the first time in years

PR Newswire

Suburbs are generally seeing home values grow more than urban areas, indicating more competition

  • Suburban home values have been growing faster than those in urban areas since July 2021, a reversal from previous norms and from the first 15 months of the pandemic.
  • With remote work now an option for more households, many buyers are prioritizing affordability over proximity to the workplace.
  • Understanding which areas are most competitive can help home shoppers navigate today's hot sellers market.

SEATTLE, May 18, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- For the first time since the Great Recession, buyers may have an easier time buying a home in the city than in nearby suburbs this home shopping season. That's because homes in the suburbs recently have been appreciating faster than urban homes, a new Zillow® analysis shows, indicating stronger demand and fiercer competition.

While competition is strong in most of the country, there are pockets of opportunity for home buyers. 

Home values in suburban ZIP codes have been growing faster than those in urban areas since July 2021. The typical home in the suburbs gained $66,490 in value in the past year, compared to $61,671 for the typical urban home. That is a reversal from previous norms and from the first 15 months of the pandemic. From January 2013 — about the time when home values began to recover following the housing crash — through June 2021, urban homes were generally gaining value more quickly.

"In the beginning of the pandemic, home values in urban areas generally outpaced suburban areas, counter to what many expected during the rush for more space," said Zillow economist Nicole Bachaud. "And while urban home value gains have continued to accelerate, the suburbs are even hotter, showing just how strong demand is for limited suburban inventory. That could mean competition for homes will be lighter near city centers this home shopping season, something we haven't been able to say for nearly a decade. That's not to say shopping for a home in the city will be a leisurely affair, but any sliver of opportunity for buyers is welcome in this market."

Faster home value growth in the suburbs comes as remote work has changed the U.S. housing landscape. Research from the National Bureau of Economic Research found the shift to remote work is responsible for more than half of the gain in U.S. home prices since late 2019, and that the evolution of remote work is likely to have a major impact on the future path of home values. 

To be sure, urban real estate has seen incredible growth, as well. This is not a case of housing in the suburbs gaining value at the expense of urban real estate; rather, it's something akin to one world-class sprinter edging out another. And there are signs that demand may be shifting back in favor of urban homes. In each of the first three months of this year, the gap between annual home value growth in the suburbs and in urban areas has shrunk. Annual suburban home value growth outpaced urban home value growth by about $7,250 in December, but only by about $4,820 in March.

The shift has been more pronounced in a few metro areas where suburban home values grew especially fast compared to urban home values in 2021: San Francisco, Columbus, Seattle and Boston. This may reflect home buyers reacting to employers' return-to-office plans, realizing that the cost savings of a move to the suburbs are not as big as they once were, or sensing that competition may not be as stiff for homes in urban parts of the metro. 

Nashville and Raleigh are two notable counterexamples. In both metros, urban home values rose more than those in the suburbs in 2021. However, after the first three months of 2022, those positions have been reversed. In the year ending March 2022, the typical suburban home in Nashville gained $7,350 more than the typical urban home, and in Raleigh, the typical suburban home gained about $9,800 more. This could signal a shift in demand in these markets, with home shoppers searching for more-affordable options in the suburbs, especially as mortgage rates keep rising. 

In today's hot sellers market, buyers should consider Zillow's tips to win a competitive bid. Hiring the right local agent and embracing new real estate technology for a speed advantage can help during the home search. Securing mortgage pre-approval and using strategies such as submitting an offer before the offer review date can help an offer stand out.

Metro Area*

Typical Home
Value
Urban ZIP
Codes

Typical Home
Value
Suburban
ZIP Codes

Year-over-Year
Gain
Typical
Urban Home

Year-over-Year
Gain
Typical
Suburban Home

United States

$370,336

$357,996

$61,671

$66,490

New York, NY

$688,835

$544,108

$55,526

$65,936

Los Angeles, CA

$905,470

$948,317

$137,475

$169,508

Chicago, IL

$341,459

$309,615

$22,599

$41,607

Dallas–Fort Worth, TX

$293,570

$353,094

$56,492

$77,878

Philadelphia, PA

$211,265

$378,456

$18,846

$51,069

Houston, TX

$272,792

$287,285

$28,239

$51,467

Washington, D.C.

$714,771

$541,843

$52,550

$53,335

Miami–Fort Lauderdale, FL

$393,920

$444,785

$68,589

$103,244

Atlanta, GA

$492,263

$368,816

$71,327

$88,741

Boston, MA

$743,060

$616,492

$63,747

$80,943

San Francisco, CA

$1,418,570

$1,371,714

$193,540

$278,806

Detroit, MI

$83,303

$293,602

$10,316

$39,119

Riverside, CA

$475,287

$560,265

$97,397

$117,261

Phoenix, AZ

$382,429

$455,948

$83,115

$101,598

Seattle, WA

$920,417

$703,419

$119,725

$146,815

Minneapolis–St. Paul, MN

$341,401

$378,623

$21,713

$46,223

San Diego, CA

$863,279

$897,487

$169,404

$182,756

St. Louis, MO

$170,579

$262,916

$16,583

$37,397

Tampa, FL

$326,295

$350,842

$64,993

$88,867

Baltimore, MD

$206,654

$411,769

$30,627

$41,517

Denver, CO

$626,133

$648,161

$99,965

$133,444

Pittsburgh, PA

$206,463

$204,442

$23,167

$26,076

Portland, OR

$609,516

$571,485

$98,531

$95,092

Charlotte, NC

$372,480

$355,729

$85,076

$86,125

Sacramento, CA

$509,417

$642,351

$84,818

$112,775

San Antonio, TX

$229,030

$289,967

$38,967

$56,570

Orlando, FL

$320,717

$372,529

$69,311

$84,227

Cincinnati, OH

$220,523

$263,550

$27,602

$36,566

Cleveland, OH

$125,404

$238,068

$21,566

$31,917

Kansas City, MO

$140,102

$308,850

$29,480

$44,037

Las Vegas, NV

$358,548

$462,498

$88,477

$113,652

Columbus, OH

$190,021

$321,239

$28,783

$49,584

Indianapolis, IN

$146,728

$300,079

$27,300

$51,785

San Jose, CA

$1,830,251

$1,578,014

$363,464

$306,105

Austin, TX

$788,338

$568,729

$206,972

$169,059

Virginia Beach, VA

$272,157

$341,218

$35,385

$48,411

Nashville, TN

$533,667

$414,423

$95,178

$102,527

Providence, RI

$334,695

$437,477

$55,140

$59,375

Milwaukee, WI

$171,859

$348,543

$22,788

$37,235

Jacksonville, FL

$270,768

$341,887

$56,407

$82,769

Memphis, TN

$125,713

$289,145

$31,024

$47,847

Oklahoma City, OK

$165,917

$228,767

$28,951

$38,359

Louisville, KY

$159,209

$261,933

$17,142

$30,512

Hartford, CT

$193,774

$311,475

$30,211

$39,630

Richmond, VA

$328,946

$321,073

$25,633

$35,939

New Orleans, LA

$311,391

$226,472

$21,378

$28,257

Buffalo, NY

$151,441

$264,176

$25,727

$39,084

Raleigh, NC

$495,075

$466,419

$110,566

$120,373

Birmingham, AL

$71,735

$252,093

$15,121

$35,651

Salt Lake City, UT

$616,663

$584,399

$121,234

$133,642

 

*Table ordered by market size 

About Zillow Group

Zillow Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: Z and ZG) is reimagining real estate to make it easier to unlock life's next chapter. As the most visited real estate website in the United States, Zillow® and its affiliates offer customers an on-demand experience for selling, buying, renting or financing with transparency and ease. 

Zillow Group's affiliates and subsidiaries include Zillow®,, Zillow Premier Agent®, Zillow Home Loans™, Zillow Closing Services™, Trulia®, Out East®, ShowingTime®, Bridge Interactive®, dotloop®, StreetEasy® and HotPads®. Zillow Home Loans, LLC is an Equal Housing Lender, NMLS #10287 (www.nmlsconsumeraccess.org).

 

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/home-buyers-may-find-less-competition-near-city-centers-for-the-first-time-in-years-301549819.html

SOURCE Zillow

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Mortgage rates fall as labor market normalizes

Jobless claims show an expanding economy. We will only be in a recession once jobless claims exceed 323,000 on a four-week moving average.

Published

on

Everyone was waiting to see if this week’s jobs report would send mortgage rates higher, which is what happened last month. Instead, the 10-year yield had a muted response after the headline number beat estimates, but we have negative job revisions from previous months. The Federal Reserve’s fear of wage growth spiraling out of control hasn’t materialized for over two years now and the unemployment rate ticked up to 3.9%. For now, we can say the labor market isn’t tight anymore, but it’s also not breaking.

The key labor data line in this expansion is the weekly jobless claims report. Jobless claims show an expanding economy that has not lost jobs yet. We will only be in a recession once jobless claims exceed 323,000 on a four-week moving average.

From the Fed: In the week ended March 2, initial claims for unemployment insurance benefits were flat, at 217,000. The four-week moving average declined slightly by 750, to 212,250


Below is an explanation of how we got here with the labor market, which all started during COVID-19.

1. I wrote the COVID-19 recovery model on April 7, 2020, and retired it on Dec. 9, 2020. By that time, the upfront recovery phase was done, and I needed to model out when we would get the jobs lost back.

2. Early in the labor market recovery, when we saw weaker job reports, I doubled and tripled down on my assertion that job openings would get to 10 million in this recovery. Job openings rose as high as to 12 million and are currently over 9 million. Even with the massive miss on a job report in May 2021, I didn’t waver.

Currently, the jobs openings, quit percentage and hires data are below pre-COVID-19 levels, which means the labor market isn’t as tight as it once was, and this is why the employment cost index has been slowing data to move along the quits percentage.  

2-US_Job_Quits_Rate-1-2

3. I wrote that we should get back all the jobs lost to COVID-19 by September of 2022. At the time this would be a speedy labor market recovery, and it happened on schedule, too

Total employment data

4. This is the key one for right now: If COVID-19 hadn’t happened, we would have between 157 million and 159 million jobs today, which would have been in line with the job growth rate in February 2020. Today, we are at 157,808,000. This is important because job growth should be cooling down now. We are more in line with where the labor market should be when averaging 140K-165K monthly. So for now, the fact that we aren’t trending between 140K-165K means we still have a bit more recovery kick left before we get down to those levels. 




From BLS: Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 275,000 in February, and the unemployment rate increased to 3.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in health care, in government, in food services and drinking places, in social assistance, and in transportation and warehousing.

Here are the jobs that were created and lost in the previous month:

IMG_5092

In this jobs report, the unemployment rate for education levels looks like this:

  • Less than a high school diploma: 6.1%
  • High school graduate and no college: 4.2%
  • Some college or associate degree: 3.1%
  • Bachelor’s degree or higher: 2.2%
IMG_5093_320f22

Today’s report has continued the trend of the labor data beating my expectations, only because I am looking for the jobs data to slow down to a level of 140K-165K, which hasn’t happened yet. I wouldn’t categorize the labor market as being tight anymore because of the quits ratio and the hires data in the job openings report. This also shows itself in the employment cost index as well. These are key data lines for the Fed and the reason we are going to see three rate cuts this year.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Last month we though that the January…

Published

on

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Last month we though that the January jobs report was the "most ridiculous in recent history" but, boy, were we wrong because this morning the Biden department of goalseeked propaganda (aka BLS) published the February jobs report, and holy crap was that something else. Even Goebbels would blush. 

What happened? Let's take a closer look.

On the surface, it was (almost) another blockbuster jobs report, certainly one which nobody expected, or rather just one bank out of 76 expected. Starting at the top, the BLS reported that in February the US unexpectedly added 275K jobs, with just one research analyst (from Dai-Ichi Research) expecting a higher number.

Some context: after last month's record 4-sigma beat, today's print was "only" 3 sigma higher than estimates. Needless to say, two multiple sigma beats in a row used to only happen in the USSR... and now in the US, apparently.

Before we go any further, a quick note on what last month we said was "the most ridiculous jobs report in recent history": it appears the BLS read our comments and decided to stop beclowing itself. It did that by slashing last month's ridiculous print by over a third, and revising what was originally reported as a massive 353K beat to just 229K,  a 124K revision, which was the biggest one-month negative revision in two years!

Of course, that does not mean that this month's jobs print won't be revised lower: it will be, and not just that month but every other month until the November election because that's the only tool left in the Biden admin's box: pretend the economic and jobs are strong, then revise them sharply lower the next month, something we pointed out first last summer and which has not failed to disappoint once.

To be fair, not every aspect of the jobs report was stellar (after all, the BLS had to give it some vague credibility). Take the unemployment rate, after flatlining between 3.4% and 3.8% for two years - and thus denying expectations from Sahm's Rule that a recession may have already started - in February the unemployment rate unexpectedly jumped to 3.9%, the highest since February 2022 (with Black unemployment spiking by 0.3% to 5.6%, an indicator which the Biden admin will quickly slam as widespread economic racism or something).

And then there were average hourly earnings, which after surging 0.6% MoM in January (since revised to 0.5%) and spooking markets that wage growth is so hot, the Fed will have no choice but to delay cuts, in February the number tumbled to just 0.1%, the lowest in two years...

... for one simple reason: last month's average wage surge had nothing to do with actual wages, and everything to do with the BLS estimate of hours worked (which is the denominator in the average wage calculation) which last month tumbled to just 34.1 (we were led to believe) the lowest since the covid pandemic...

... but has since been revised higher while the February print rose even more, to 34.3, hence why the latest average wage data was once again a product not of wages going up, but of how long Americans worked in any weekly period, in this case higher from 34.1 to 34.3, an increase which has a major impact on the average calculation.

While the above data points were examples of some latent weakness in the latest report, perhaps meant to give it a sheen of veracity, it was everything else in the report that was a problem starting with the BLS's latest choice of seasonal adjustments (after last month's wholesale revision), which have gone from merely laughable to full clownshow, as the following comparison between the monthly change in BLS and ADP payrolls shows. The trend is clear: the Biden admin numbers are now clearly rising even as the impartial ADP (which directly logs employment numbers at the company level and is far more accurate), shows an accelerating slowdown.

But it's more than just the Biden admin hanging its "success" on seasonal adjustments: when one digs deeper inside the jobs report, all sorts of ugly things emerge... such as the growing unprecedented divergence between the Establishment (payrolls) survey and much more accurate Household (actual employment) survey. To wit, while in January the BLS claims 275K payrolls were added, the Household survey found that the number of actually employed workers dropped for the third straight month (and 4 in the past 5), this time by 184K (from 161.152K to 160.968K).

This means that while the Payrolls series hits new all time highs every month since December 2020 (when according to the BLS the US had its last month of payrolls losses), the level of Employment has not budged in the past year. Worse, as shown in the chart below, such a gaping divergence has opened between the two series in the past 4 years, that the number of Employed workers would need to soar by 9 million (!) to catch up to what Payrolls claims is the employment situation.

There's more: shifting from a quantitative to a qualitative assessment, reveals just how ugly the composition of "new jobs" has been. Consider this: the BLS reports that in February 2024, the US had 132.9 million full-time jobs and 27.9 million part-time jobs. Well, that's great... until you look back one year and find that in February 2023 the US had 133.2 million full-time jobs, or more than it does one year later! And yes, all the job growth since then has been in part-time jobs, which have increased by 921K since February 2023 (from 27.020 million to 27.941 million).

Here is a summary of the labor composition in the past year: all the new jobs have been part-time jobs!

But wait there's even more, because now that the primary season is over and we enter the heart of election season and political talking points will be thrown around left and right, especially in the context of the immigration crisis created intentionally by the Biden administration which is hoping to import millions of new Democratic voters (maybe the US can hold the presidential election in Honduras or Guatemala, after all it is their citizens that will be illegally casting the key votes in November), what we find is that in February, the number of native-born workers tumbled again, sliding by a massive 560K to just 129.807 million. Add to this the December data, and we get a near-record 2.4 million plunge in native-born workers in just the past 3 months (only the covid crash was worse)!

The offset? A record 1.2 million foreign-born (read immigrants, both legal and illegal but mostly illegal) workers added in February!

Said otherwise, not only has all job creation in the past 6 years has been exclusively for foreign-born workers...

Source: St Louis Fed FRED Native Born and Foreign Born

... but there has been zero job-creation for native born workers since June 2018!

This is a huge issue - especially at a time of an illegal alien flood at the southwest border...

... and is about to become a huge political scandal, because once the inevitable recession finally hits, there will be millions of furious unemployed Americans demanding a more accurate explanation for what happened - i.e., the illegal immigration floodgates that were opened by the Biden admin.

Which is also why Biden's handlers will do everything in their power to insure there is no official recession before November... and why after the election is over, all economic hell will finally break loose. Until then, however, expect the jobs numbers to get even more ridiculous.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/08/2024 - 13:30

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Angry Shouting Aside, Here’s What Biden Is Running On

Angry Shouting Aside, Here’s What Biden Is Running On

Last night, Joe Biden gave an extremely dark, threatening, angry State of the Union…

Published

on

Angry Shouting Aside, Here's What Biden Is Running On

Last night, Joe Biden gave an extremely dark, threatening, angry State of the Union address - in which he insisted that the American economy is doing better than ever, blamed inflation on 'corporate greed,' and warned that Donald Trump poses an existential threat to the republic.

But in between the angry rhetoric, he also laid out his 2024 election platform - for which additional details will be released on March 11, when the White House sends its proposed budget to Congress.

To that end, Goldman Sachs' Alec Phillips and Tim Krupa have summarized the key points:

Taxes

While railing against billionaires (nothing new there), Biden repeated the claim that anyone making under $400,000 per year won't see an increase in their taxes.  He also proposed a 21% corporate minimum tax, up from 15% on book income outlined in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), as well as raising the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28% (which would promptly be passed along to consumers in the form of more inflation). Goldman notes that "Congress is unlikely to consider any of these proposals this year, they would only come into play in a second Biden term, if Democrats also won House and Senate majorities."

Biden also called on Congress to restore the pandemic-era child tax credit.

Immigration

Instead of simply passing a slew of border security Executive Orders like the Trump ones he shredded on day one, Biden repeated the lie that Congress 'needs to act' before he can (translation: send money to Ukraine or the US border will continue to be a sieve).

As immigration comes into even greater focus heading into the election, we continue to expect the Administration to tighten policy (e.g., immigration has surged 20pp the last 7 months to first place with 28% in Gallup’s “most important problem” survey). As such, we estimate the foreign-born contribution to monthly labor force growth will moderate from 110k/month in 2023 to around 70-90k/month in 2024. -GS

Ukraine

Biden, with House Speaker Mike Johnson doing his best impression of a bobble-head, urged Congress to pass additional assistance for Ukraine based entirely on the premise that Russia 'won't stop' there (and would what, trigger article 5 and WW3 no matter what?), despite the fact that Putin explicitly told Tucker Carlson he has no further ambitions, and in fact seeks a settlement.

As Goldman estimates, "While there is still a clear chance that such a deal could come together, for now there is no clear path forward for Ukraine aid in Congress."

China

Biden, forgetting about all the aggressive tariffs, suggested that Trump had been soft on China, and that he will stand up "against China's unfair economic practices" and "for peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait."

Healthcare

Lastly, Biden proposed to expand drug price negotiations to 50 additional drugs each year (an increase from 20 outlined in the IRA), which Goldman said would likely require bipartisan support "even if Democrats controlled Congress and the White House," as such policies would likely be ineligible for the budget "reconciliation" process which has been used in previous years to pass the IRA and other major fiscal party when Congressional margins are just too thin.

So there you have it. With no actual accomplishments to speak of, Biden can only attack Trump, lie, and make empty promises.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/08/2024 - 18:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending