2024 International Housing Affordability report

[iheartthed]

The International Housing Affordability study performed by Chapman University for Demographia was recently released. It is mostly limited to anglophone markets in highly developed countries or autonomous regions. Affordability was calculated by as a ratio of the median house price and the median household income.

The following countries/regions were included: Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, New Zealand, Singapore, United Kingdom, and the United States. The least expensive market was Pittsburgh, and most expensive was Hong Kong. All of the major California metros landed among the 10 least affordable.

10 most affordable markets (rank)

• Pittsburgh, USA (1)
• Rochester, USA (2 tie)
• St. Louis, USA (2 tie)
• Cleveland, USA (4)
• Edmonton, CAN (5 tie)
• Buffalo, USA (5 tie)
• Detroit, USA (5 tie)
• Oklahoma City, USA (5 tie)
• Cincinnati, USA (9 tie)
• Louisville, USA (9 tie)

10 least affordable markets (rank)

• Toronto, CAN (84)
• San Diego, USA (85)
• Adelaide, AUS (86 tie)
• San Francisco, USA (86 tie)
• Melbourne, AUS (88)
• Honolulu, USA (89)
• Los Angeles, USA (90)
• San Jose, USA (91)
• Vancouver, CAN (92)
• Sydney, AUS (93)
• Hong Kong, CHN (94)

Full list on pages 22 and 23 of this link: https://www.chapman.edu/communicatio...ordability.pdf

[Steely Dan]

Of the 25 most affordable, 14 are Midwest/rustbelt.

Ok, that checks out.

And then Milwaukee is inexplicably at #53, WAY out of step with all its regional cousins, which seems quite odd to me at face value.

[homebucket]

Looks like I’m an Australian now!

G’day, mates!

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Looks like I’m an Australian now!

G’day, mates!

I knew I'd screw one of those up lol

[creamcityleo79]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Of the 25 most affordable, 14 are Midwest/rustbelt.

Ok, that checks out.

And then Milwaukee is inexplicably at #53, WAY out of step with all its regional cousins, which seems quite odd to me at face value.

Housing prices have gone WAY up in Milwaukee. This is likely the culprit. It's not where it used to be AT ALL with housing (the biggest driver of COL).

[Innsertnamehere]

so funny that the 6th most affordable City is less than a 2hr drive from the 10th most unaffordable one.

[MolsonExport]

^Buffalo (sixth most affordable) is maybe 2-2.5 hours-drive from Toronto (most unaffordable). Whoops: Toronto is not ranked first, just listed first.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by creamcityleo79

Housing prices have gone WAY up in Milwaukee. This is likely the culprit. It's not where it used to be AT ALL with housing (the biggest driver of COL).

At first, I was like "but haven't all markets from coast to coast seen dramatic housing price increases?".

But then looking at NAR data for median SFH value by metro area for 2023, it looks like metro Milwaukee is a bit out step with its Midwest/rustbelt peers.


NAR median SFH value by metro area (2023):

Minneapolis: $379.9K
Milwaukee: $372.4k
Chicago: $351.2K
Kansas City: $320.1K
Grand rapids: $317.8K
Columbus: $312.7K
Indianapolis: $305.2K
Cincinnati: $282.0K
Louisville; $263.8K
St. Louis: $254.4K
Detroit: $251.1K
Buffalo: $240.5K
Pittsburgh: $216.3K
Cleveland: $214.3K

Source: https://www.nar.realtor/research-and...-affordability



I would never have expected Milwaukee to be second on this list (and ahead of Chicago???). I would've thought more in the St. Louis range.

I guess Milwaukee's days of being a "bargain Chicago" are over.

[homebucket]

Interesting. If you associate housing prices as an indirect marker of desirability, that would make Milwaukee the most desirable city on the Great Lakes.

I guess you could say Chicago is a "bargain" or poor man's Milwaukee.

This would naturally beg the question, why? How did this happen?

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Interesting. If you associate housing prices as an indirect marker of desirability, that would make Milwaukee the most desirable city on the Great Lakes.

I guess you could say Chicago is a "bargain" or poor man's Milwaukee.

This would naturally beg the question, why? How did this happen?

Population is way more of an indicator of "desirability" than price.

[Nouvellecosse]

Interesting how people so often lump Toronto and Vancouver together in terms of affordability, but while neither are affordable BC is at a different level. Toronto is slightly more affordable than any of California's big four or Australia's two largest while Vancouver is less affordable than any of them.

[SIGSEGV]

this is very strange, from the NAR:



Fond du Lac (could be considered Milwaukee exurb), Kankakee and Rockford (could be considered Chicago exurbs) leading in SFH price gains.

[Crawford]

Weird. How is Milwaukee that expensive?

Something is funky with the NAR data. Grand Rapids is apples-apples much cheaper than Metro Detroit. Granted, maybe its the differing distribution of apples but I suspect something is off.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Weird. How is Milwaukee that expensive?

If I had to guess, more greenfield development? Milwaukee proper doesn't seem that expensive...

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

If I had to guess, more greenfield development? Milwaukee proper doesn't seem that expensive...

Also, Chicago suburbs going into Milwaukee are the nicer ones.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Gantz

Also, Chicago suburbs going into Milwaukee are the nicer ones.

There are no suburbs of Chicago that go into Milwaukee.

Besides, the whole "northshore" phenomenon of Chicagoland ends abruptly when it slams into North Chicago/Waukegan, roughly 45 miles south of Milwaukee.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Gantz

Also, Chicago suburbs going into Milwaukee are the nicer ones.

Yeah, but not near Milwaukee. Winnetka and the like, while north of Chicago, are a long way from Milwaukee. The way north suburbs in Chicagoland certainly aren't fancy. Lake Forest is likely the northernmost suburb with some degree of snob appeal, and Lake Forest is much cheaper than Winnetka/Glencoe area.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

There are no suburbs of Chicago that go into Milwaukee.

Besides, the whole "northshore" phenomenon of Chicagoland ends abruptly when it slams into North Chicago/Waukegan, roughly 45 miles south of Milwaukee.

I know that Chicago northern suburbs don't reach Milwaukee, but I was wondering if there is some influence nevertheless. I'd guess northern Chicagoans go to Milwaukee more often as well.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Gantz

I know that Chicago northern suburbs don't reach Milwaukee, but I was wondering if there is some influence nevertheless. I'd guess northern Chicagoans go to Milwaukee more often as well.

Cross-pollination influences between Chicago and Milwaukee are minimal at best.

Everything below the state line is oriented toward Chicago, and everything from Racine up is oriented toward Milwaukee, with Kenosha kinda caught in the middle with one foot in each.

But this is all getting off topic. Chicago's northshore burbs have zero influence on anything in metro Milwaukee, and cannot explain why the NAR data shows Milwaukee median SFH values being so (relatively) high.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Lake Forest is likely the northernmost suburb with some degree of snob appeal, and Lake Forest is much cheaper than Winnetka/Glencoe area.

Really? I thought Lake Forest was the fanciest of the north shore suburbs. About 10 years ago I spent a few days in Lake Forest and Lake Bluff visiting friends, and LF seemed very bougie and like it had more big estates with lots of land. Lake Bluff was really charming and more walkable, but also seemed more approachable. I've never been to Winnetka or Glencoe, though.