Vancouver Real Estate 'Bubble' at 30-year Peak

[GMD]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Vancouver 's housing is bizarre and exceptionally unhealthy. Vancouver couldbn't have done a worse job on the housing front if it tries.Vancouver is so grossly overvalued that people now think it's almost normal. Vancouverites like to say that "Toronto is expensive too" yet comparing Toronto and Vancouver's prices is laughable.

Let's put this into perspective. Currently in the City of Toronto which basically means SFH prior to 1980 {think Zone 1 & 2 on the Translink pass} there are over 800 SFH for sale under $1,000,000. In Van/Rich/NV/WV/Burn/NW, you would be VERY lucky to find a single SFH under 1.4. SFH are more expensive in God-forsaken Langley than they are in inner city Toronto {ie City of Vancouver}. SFH prices in Greater Vancouver would have to drop up to 40% just to come "down" to Toronto levels.

The stats that the REBGV like to use is that Vancouver is only about 20% more expensive than Toronto but that is exceedingly deceptive because it includes ALL types of housing and Vancouverites are far more likely to live in condos than Torontonians which greatly warps the numbers. This made even worse by the fact that SFHs in Toronto are uniformly larger than Vancouver because there is no such thing in Toronto {or anywhere in Ontario for that matter} as a house without a basement. I had never even heard of a crawl space until I moved to Vancouver.

When it comes to housing, Vancouver is truly in a league of it's own in the worse possible way.

I'd say 20% is about right for the like-for-like difference in detached house prices between Toronto and Vancouver. Which reflects that Vancouver is a nicer place, with nicer weather and a more constrained land availability. If anything, the steady rate of interprovincial migration from Ontario to B.C. suggests that Ontario is doing worse than BC with respect to affordability, taking everything into consideration. Obviously, both BC and Ontario are doing much worse than Alberta, although to be fair, the cities in Alberta have yet to run into the sort of land/space constraints that apply to Toronto and Vancouver.

[GenWhy?]

Toronto recently this Summer I think allows tri-plexes and might pass rules that permit upto 6 units, similar to here, which could affect land prices there once passed.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Vancouver 's housing is bizarre and exceptionally unhealthy. Vancouver couldbn't have done a worse job on the housing front if it tries.Vancouver is so grossly overvalued that people now think it's almost normal. Vancouverites like to say that "Toronto is expensive too" yet comparing Toronto and Vancouver's prices is laughable.

Let's put this into perspective. Currently in the City of Toronto which basically means SFH prior to 1980 {think Zone 1 & 2 on the Translink pass} there are over 800 SFH for sale under $1,000,000. In Van/Rich/NV/WV/Burn/NW, you would be VERY lucky to find a single SFH under 1.4. SFH are more expensive in God-forsaken Langley than they are in inner city Toronto {ie City of Vancouver}. SFH prices in Greater Vancouver would have to drop up to 40% just to come "down" to Toronto levels.

The stats that the REBGV like to use is that Vancouver is only about 20% more expensive than Toronto but that is exceedingly deceptive because it includes ALL types of housing and Vancouverites are far more likely to live in condos than Torontonians which greatly warps the numbers. This made even worse by the fact that SFHs in Toronto are uniformly larger than Vancouver because there is no such thing in Toronto {or anywhere in Ontario for that matter} as a house without a basement. I had never even heard of a crawl space until I moved to Vancouver.

When it comes to housing, Vancouver is truly in a league of it's own in the worse possible way.

TRREB covers the whole of Greater Toronto. It covers a much bigger area, so includes far more distant areas than the Greater Vancouver Realtors (who changed their name from REBGV a couple of years ago). Both Boards publish community data, and publish the sales data for detached, semi - detached, townhouse and condos. There's also the Fraser Valley real estate board, that covers Surrey, White Rock and down the Valley. It also publshes data for each of the municipalities, broken out by home types.

You can find parts of Central Toronto where the sold price of detached homes is higher than those in Vancouver West, for example. As you noted, the housing stock isn't the same in Vancouver and Toronto. You would have to compare similar homes and areas to get anything like a useful comparison between the two places.

There have been studies looking at the cost of housing construction in Vancouver and Toronto. There's almost no difference between the two - they're both expensive.

[whatnext]

Some stats out today:

Vancouver home sales down 14 per cent in October from last year
By The Canadian Press
Published: November 04, 2025 at 1:52PM EST

VANCOUVER — Vancouver-area home sales dropped 14.3 per cent in October compared with a year earlier while the benchmark price was down 3.4 per cent.

Greater Vancouver Realtors says sales in the region totalled 2,255 homes, which was 14.5 per cent below the 10-year seasonal average.

New listings of 5,438 were down a slight 0.3 per cent from a year earlier but still 16.3 per cent above the 10-year average....

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business...rom-last-year/

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Changing City

TRREB covers the whole of Greater Toronto. It covers a much bigger area, so includes far more distant areas than the Greater Vancouver Realtors (who changed their name from REBGV a couple of years ago). Both Boards publish community data, and publish the sales data for detached, semi - detached, townhouse and condos. There's also the Fraser Valley real estate board, that covers Surrey, White Rock and down the Valley. It also publshes data for each of the municipalities, broken out by home types.

You can find parts of Central Toronto where the sold price of detached homes is higher than those in Vancouver West, for example. As you noted, the housing stock isn't the same in Vancouver and Toronto. You would have to compare similar homes and areas to get anything like a useful comparison between the two places.

There have been studies looking at the cost of housing construction in Vancouver and Toronto. There's almost no difference between the two - they're both expensive.

You are correct that TRB includes areas well outside of the City of Toronto. I, however, did NOT use TREB stats as I simply went to realtor.ca and used the City of Toronto for SFH less than $1 million and found over 800 for sale.

GMD...........Toronto is also constrained by land availability due to the Greenbelt which surrounds it much like Vancouver's ALR. Also Toronto is a much more densely populated city than Vancouver. The City alone has 3.2 million, which is more than all of Greater Vancouver from Horseshoe Bay to Aldergrove. As for a "nicer place to live", well that is all the eyes of the beholder and what people's priorities and interests are. Toronto does well with it's beautiful Lakeshore and River Valleys but Vancouver is nothing short of spectacular with it's oceanfront, striking mountain backdrop, parks to die for, and mild climate. Vancouver is an outdoorsy paradise, no debate about that. Conversely, Toronto is a much more cosmopolitan city with a nightlife, arts scene, cultural venues, shopping, and restaurant scene that blows Vancouver out of the water. Vancouver is as boring and soulless as it is striking. Again, depends of what wants in their city. Anyway, the reality is that Vancouver SFH prices would have to drop 70% just to make them possible for the middle class once again and in line with local incomes.

Vancouver is in for a very rough ride over the next few years. Vancouver's economy has been based upon real estate speculation for the past 30 years. It was endlessly propped up by ever more consumers from abroad but now those flippers are gone and Vancouver's real estate based economy is about to suffer a very hard hit. This is the equivalent of all the auto plants & suppliers shutting down in Windsor.

Vancouver's real estate has become very much an economic addiction for the city. Like all addictions, at first you use it to feel good but then you have to keep using it to stop from feeling bad. Now Vancouver's real estate drug dealers have left town and she is now going to suffer the very painful effects of withdrawal. The pain will be profound but if she can kick the habit, she will be far better off in the long run.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Toronto is also constrained by land availability due to teh Greenbelt which surrounds it much like Vancouver's ALR.

Golden Horseshoe minus Greenbelt: 23,462 sqkm
Lower Mainland minus ALR: 14,143 sqkm (2,099 in Metro Van, 12,044 in the Valley)

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Also Toronto is a much more densely populated city than Vancouver. The City alone has 3.2 million, which is more than all of Greater Vancouver from Horseshoe Bay to Aldergrove.

Since you know how to look things up, you'll be able to find out for yourself that this statement is false.

Toronto
Downtown: 16,608 sq/km
City: 4,428/sqkm
Metro: 942/sqkm

Vancouver
Downtown: 18,837/sqkm
City: 5,750/sqkm
Metro: 918.0/sqkm

Toronto proper needs four other counties to beat Vancouver, and only by a nose. Vancouver is objectively more crowded.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Golden Horseshoe minus Greenbelt: 23,462 sqkm
Lower Mainland minus ALR: 14,143 sqkm (2,099 in Metro Van, 12,044 in the Valley)


Since you know how to look things up, you'll be able to find out for yourself that this statement is false.

Thank you for looking up the numbers.


ssiguy - why do you keep doing this? This is far from the first time you've posted cherry picked data to show that Toronto rules and Vancouver is lame. Every time you do it someone looks up the info and soon after you tend to disappear. What do you get out of it?

Are either Toronto or Vancouver perfect to everyone by every single metric imaginable - no.

[logan5]

I'd like to see the Toronto/Vancouver numbers compared by $/sq foot because a lot of these lots in Toronto are smaller than Vancouver, so you are getting less land for what you pay in Toronto.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Every time you do it someone looks up the info and soon after you tend to disappear. What do you get out of it?

Doomers and declinists are definitely not part of the solution.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Golden Horseshoe minus Greenbelt: 23,462 sqkm
Lower Mainland minus ALR: 14,143 sqkm (2,099 in Metro Van, 12,044 in the Valley)



Since you know how to look things up, you'll be able to find out for yourself that this statement is false.

Toronto
Downtown: 16,608 sq/km
City: 4,428/sqkm
Metro: 942/sqkm

Vancouver
Downtown: 18,837/sqkm
City: 5,750/sqkm
Metro: 918.0/sqkm

Toronto proper needs four other counties to beat Vancouver, and only by a nose. Vancouver is objectively more crowded.

Do you realize you just proved my point?

The City of Toronto has 3.2 million with a pop density, as you state, of 4,428. Metro Vancouver has a population of 3.1 million but with a population density, as you state, of 918. Vancouver City seems more densely than Toronto because it's boundaries are artificially small where Toronto City takes in North York, Etob/Scar, East York. This is why I used the analogy of a 2 Zone Translink bus pass to compare it to the City of Toronto.

As for this I hate Vancouver crap, that is patently false and as I said Vancouver is strikingly beautiful, parks to die for, and an outdoorsy paradise. I'm not sure how that could be construed as hating a place. Toronto is simply a vastly more urban environment than Vancouver just as Vancouver is a vastly more outdoorsy one than Toronto. It's not good or bad, it's just what one's priorities and lifestyle are.

[ssiguy]

Getting back on topic.........there is no way around the fact that Vancouver housing is completely detached from local incomes and it is very unhealthy. This is the primary reason why BC is Canada's only shrinking province. It's not that the place has gone to hell all of a sudden or that people are dying to live in Alberta but simply the fact Vancouver is not tenable for anyone who is not of high income or didn't choose the right parents.

This is nothing but bad news for Vancouver mid/long term economic outlook. It's not just the people moving away but rather the demographic and they are overwhelmingly young and usually highly skilled. These are the exact kind of workers BC can't afford to lose. People don't go to university for 5 years for the utter joy of maybe being able to get a basement apt and in 10 years of heavy savings, buy a shoebox 45 minutes from your workplace. I have a degree in Sociology and the term is "deferred gratification". It's the concept that you forego money/time now for a better return tomorrow and the obvious example is education. Young people aren't willing to spend so much time and money on their post-secondary and come out on the other end with a low standard of living.

If Vancouver wants to get back to being a livable city, the first thing it needs is for people to be able to afford to live here.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

- snip -

What I proved is that you have no idea what the hell you're talking about. The City of Toronto is not analogous to Metro Van, it's just the City of Vancouver (which itself incorporates the former munis of Point Grey and South Van) spread out over a larger area because there's no mountains or ocean in the way. Granted, Mississauga and Scarborough are denser than Surrey.

Both cities are up to their necks in unaffordability no matter how many detached homes you can cherrypick from one realtor site. Since we're accepting anecdotes, I visited family on Queen Street last year, and the price of everything is exactly the same as here.
All you've demonstrated is that Toronto has more empty space; their vacancy rate was 3.7% at the start of the year, while ours was 2.1%.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

This is the primary reason why BC is Canada's only shrinking province.

Also false - we're growing by 150k+ every year. Facebook is not a reliable source of information*; we can't be both shrinking and taking too many people in, because those mutually-opposing arguments cancel each other out.

At any rate, BC is in the process of forcing density in every single city and town and reducing study and work permits: increased supply, reduced demand.

(*Social media, however, is full of ex-BC residents who regret their move and want to come back.)

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Getting back on topic.........there is no way around the fact that Vancouver housing is completely detached from local incomes and it is very unhealthy. This is the primary reason why BC is Canada's only shrinking province. It's not that the place has gone to hell all of a sudden or that people are dying to live in Alberta but simply the fact Vancouver is not tenable for anyone who is not of high income or didn't choose the right parents.

This is nothing but bad news for Vancouver mid/long term economic outlook. It's not just the people moving away but rather the demographic and they are overwhelmingly young and usually highly skilled. These are the exact kind of workers BC can't afford to lose. People don't go to university for 5 years for the utter joy of maybe being able to get a basement apt and in 10 years of heavy savings, buy a shoebox 45 minutes from your workplace. I have a degree in Sociology and the term is "deferred gratification". It's the concept that you forego money/time now for a better return tomorrow and the obvious example is education. Young people aren't willing to spend so much time and money on their post-secondary and come out on the other end with a low standard of living.

If Vancouver wants to get back to being a livable city, the first thing it needs is for people to be able to afford to live here.

The Teranet Index shows Vancouver's house prices are down 5.23% this year, while Calgary's have risen by 2.45% and Edmonton by 5.61%.

Vancouver's prices were the same in September 2025 as they were in September 2022. In Calgary they had risen 16% in the same 3-year period, and in Edmonton 9.6%. So Alberta has been getting much less affordable, while Vancouver is now slightly less unaffordable.

As for "BC is Canada's only shrinking province" the Statistics Canada estimates show population growth in every province in the past year.

BC's Q3 2025 estimate was 2,154 lower than Q2 2025. If you passed your Sociology degree statistics course, you'll know that 0.038% difference in a single quarter would be considered 'not statistically significant', especially as these are estimates, and subject to both revision, and 'contain a certain margin of inaccuracy'.

As you've been banging on about stopping all immigration, and sending students and temporary workers away, you should be delighted that population growth is apparently slowing in BC. It may partly explain the falling house prices, while the growing Alberta population might be related to their rising prices (although correlation does not imply causation, as you no doubt recall).

[WarrenC12]

The same people that have been crowing about Vancouver's housing prices for decades are still on the same tired old talking points.

There is absolutely no doubt that things are becoming more affordable in Metro Vancouver (and Toronto) year over year. When you look at a longer picture and include inflation adjustments, home values have been flat for a long time.

Are they "affordable"? Not really, depending on your metrics. But things are moving in the right direction.

[ssiguy]

Yes, housing prices have declined slightly in the last year both real estate and rentals. I never said otherwise. What you have to consider is they were starting from astronomically high levels. Real estate in Alberta has been rising but they were are a third the price of Vancouver's to begin with. Rolls Royce may have just cut their prices by 5% but that doesn't change the fact that I still can't afford one.

Vancouver, and BC in general, have created policies that have gone out of their way to bring us to the point we are now.

From openly welcoming all foreign money {regardless of how they got it}, turning a blind eye to Vancouver's notorious money laundering network, to having absolutely draconian urban planning where SFH homes make up over 80% of city's housing land. This is why there is no missing middle in Vancouver, the City created the environment where there isn't any and even worse, guaranteeing the fact that there never will be. Vancouver's total lack of heritage protection is why so thousands of houses in Vancouver have been torn down and simply replaced with other SFH. The house is worth nothing but the land it sits on and that is completely bizarre.

Your attitudes exemplify exactly what I said earlier, that people in Vancouver now just consider it's real estate lunacy as normal. Housing is no longer considered a place to live but just another stock on the market playing with people's lives.

[GenWhy?]

"The house is worth nothing but the land it sits on and that is completely bizarre."

Seems reasonable to me seeing what you can replace old houses with nowadays.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Yes, housing prices have declined slightly in the last year both real estate and rentals. I never said otherwise. What you have to consider is they were starting from astronomically high levels. Real estate in Alberta has been rising but they were are a third the price of Vancouver's to begin with. Rolls Royce may have just cut their prices by 5% but that doesn't change the fact that I still can't afford one.

Vancouver, and BC in general, have created policies that have gone out of their way to bring us to the point we are now.

From openly welcoming all foreign money {regardless of how they got it}, turning a blind eye to Vancouver's notorious money laundering network, to having absolutely draconian urban planning where SFH homes make up over 80% of city's housing land. This is why there is no missing middle in Vancouver, the City created the environment where there isn't any and even worse, guaranteeing the fact that there never will be. Vancouver's total lack of heritage protection is why so thousands of houses in Vancouver have been torn down and simply replaced with other SFH. The house is worth nothing but the land it sits on and that is completely bizarre.

Your attitudes exemplify exactly what I said earlier, that people in Vancouver now just consider it's real estate lunacy as normal. Housing is no longer considered a place to live but just another stock on the market playing with people's lives.

Everybody knows Vancouver has expensive housing. Do you have a point to your endless ranting on the same topics?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Doomers and declinists are definitely not part of the solution.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Doomers and declinists are definitely not part of the solution.

"Nobody goes there anymore, it's too busy."