SacramentoHousingBubble

 
Home Inventories (Supply) in the 4 County Greater Sacramento Area

(1993 to 2005)

El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
                   
# of
Homes
%
Chg
# of
Homes
%
Chg
# of
Homes
%
Chg
# of
Homes
%
Chg
# of
Homes
%
Chg
4/30/1993                 11604  
4/30/1994 1395 0.00% 1682 0.00% 6739 0.00% 628 0.00% 10444 0.00%
4/30/1995 1400 0.36% 1700 1.07% 6600 -2.06% 628 0.00% 10328 -1.11%
4/30/1996 1400 0.36% 1675 -0.42% 5800 -13.93% 615 -2.07% 9490 -9.13%
4/30/1997 1350 -3.23% 1600 -4.88% 5400 -19.87% 615 -2.07% 8965 -14.16%
4/30/1998 1150 -17.56% 1200 -28.66% 4400 -34.71% 615 -2.07% 7365 -29.48%
4/30/1999 1000 -28.32% 1100 -34.60% 4000 -40.64% 200 -68.15% 6300 -39.68%
4/30/2000 650 -53.41% 800 -52.44% 2800 -58.45% 100 -84.08% 4350 -58.35%
4/30/2001 650 -53.41% 1000 -40.55% 2800 -58.45% 50 -92.04% 4500 -56.91%
4/30/2002 650 -53.41% 1025 -39.06% 2250 -66.61% 50 -92.04% 3975 -61.94%
4/30/2003 650 -53.41% 1050 -37.57% 2300 -65.87% 225 -64.17% 4225 -59.55%
4/30/2004 625 -55.20% 650 -61.36% 1700 -74.77% 200 -68.15% 3175 -69.60%
4/30/2005 594 -57.42% 1070 -36.39% 2545 -62.23% 214 -65.92% 4423 -57.65%
                     
5/31/2005                 5290 -49.35%
6/30/2005                 6246 -40.20%
7/31/2005                 7263 -30.46%
Inventory Changes Beginning 8/8/2005
8/8/2005 912 0.00% 1,476 0.00% 4,274 0.00% 414 0.00% 7,076 0.00%
8/9/2005 914 0.22% 1,460 -1.08% 4,313 0.91% 414 0.00% 7,101 0.35%
8/10/2005 918 0.66% 1,462 -0.95% 4,345 1.66% 413 -0.24% 7,138 0.88%
8/11/2005 925 1.43% 1,479 0.20% 4,392 2.76% 419 1.21% 7,215 1.96%
8/12/2005 921 0.99% 1,482 0.41% 4,424 3.51% 421 1.69% 7,248 2.43%
8/13/2005 921 0.99% 1,508 2.17% 4,518 5.71% 418 0.97% 7,365 4.08%
8/14/2005 923 1.21% 1,512 2.44% 4,537 6.15% 415 0.24% 7,387 4.40%
8/15/2005 931 2.08% 1,509 2.24% 4,525 5.87% 413 -0.24% 7,378 4.27%
8/16/2005 938 2.85% 1,511 2.37% 4,566 6.83% 410 -0.97% 7,425 4.93%
8/17/2005 934 2.41% 1,522 3.12% 4,604 7.72% 415 0.24% 7,475 5.64%
8/18/2005 928 1.75% 1,541 4.40% 4,640 8.56% 419 1.21% 7,528 6.39%
8/19/2005 939 2.96% 1,550 5.01% 4,679 9.48% 429 3.62% 7,597 7.36%
8/20/2005 949 4.06% 1,584 7.32% 4,776 11.75% 436 5.31% 7,745 9.45%
8/21/2005 944 3.51% 1,581 7.11% 4,793 12.14% 437 5.56% 7,755 9.60%
8/22/2005 943 3.40% 1,578 6.91% 4,789 12.05% 435 5.07% 7,745 9.45%
8/23/2005 958 5.04% 1,579 6.98% 4,798 12.26% 439 6.04% 7,774 9.86%
8/24/2005 964 5.70% 1,583 7.25% 4,824 12.87% 442 6.76% 7,813 10.42%
8/25/2005 964 5.70% 1,582 7.18% 4,854 13.57% 444 7.25% 7,844 10.85%
8/26/2005 958 5.04% 1,581 7.11% 4,927 15.28% 451 8.94% 7,917 11.89%
8/27/2005 970 6.36% 1,622 9.89% 5,052 18.20% 455 9.90% 8,099 14.46%
8/28/2005 973 6.69% 1,621 9.82% 5,059 18.37% 460 11.11% 8,113 14.66%
8/29/2005 976 7.02% 1,620 9.76% 5,056 18.30% 457 10.39% 8,109 14.60%
8/30/2005 983 7.79% 1,617 9.55% 5,058 18.34% 455 9.90% 8,113 14.66%
8/31/2005 989 8.44% 1,619 9.69% 5,082 18.91% 463 11.84% 8,153 15.22%
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
9/1/2005 985 8.00% 1,613 9.28% 5,090 19.09% 465 12.32% 8,153 15.22%
9/2/2005 993 8.88% 1,608 8.94% 5,124 19.89% 476 14.98% 8,201 15.90%
9/3/2005 1,014 11.18% 1,653 11.99% 5,228 22.32% 484 16.91% 8,379 18.41%
9/4/2005 1,020 11.84% 1,655 12.13% 5,255 22.95% 487 17.63% 8,417 18.95%
9/5/2005 1,018 11.62% 1,652 11.92% 5,257 23.00% 490 18.36% 8,417 18.95%
9/6/2005 1,016 11.40% 1,648 11.65% 5,252 22.88% 495 19.57% 8,411 18.87%
9/7/2005 1,019 11.73% 1,653 11.99% 5,269 23.28% 500 20.77% 8,441 19.29%
9/8/2005 1,026 12.50% 1,642 11.25% 5,322 24.52% 508 22.71% 8,498 20.10%
9/9/2005 1,032 13.16% 1,658 12.33% 5,359 25.39% 510 23.19% 8,559 20.96%
9/10/2005 1,043 14.36% 1,696 14.91% 5,473 28.05% 522 26.09% 8,734 23.43%
9/11/2005 1,045 14.58% 1,693 14.70% 5,481 28.24% 530 28.02% 8,749 23.64%
9/12/2005 1,040 14.04% 1,698 15.04% 5,483 28.29% 530 28.02% 8,751 23.67%
9/13/2005 1,054 15.57% 1,709 15.79% 5,475 28.10% 529 27.78% 8,767 23.90%
9/14/2005 1,054 15.57% 1,711 15.92% 5,494 28.54% 533 28.74% 8,792 24.25%
9/15/2005 1,056 15.79% 1,724 16.80% 5,526 29.29% 538 29.95% 8,844 24.99%
9/16/2005 1,059 16.12% 1,738 17.75% 5,524 29.25% 534 28.99% 8,855 25.14%
9/17/2005 1,062 16.45% 1,778 20.46% 5,616 31.40% 544 31.40% 9,000 27.19%
9/18/2005 1,056 15.79% 1,774 20.19% 5,631 31.75% 539 30.19% 9,000 27.19%
9/19/2005 1,063 16.56% 1,772 20.05% 5,645 32.08% 538 29.95% 9,018 27.44%
9/20/2005 1,070 17.32% 1,769 19.85% 5,638 31.91% 547 32.13% 9,024 27.53%
9/21/2005 1,070 17.32% 1,769 19.85% 5,665 32.55% 551 33.09% 9,055 27.97%
9/22/2005 1,070 17.32% 1,761 19.31% 5,697 33.29% 556 34.30% 9,084 28.38%
9/23/2005 1,070 17.32% 1,787 21.07% 5,744 34.39% 558 34.78% 9,159 29.44%
9/24/2005 1,070 17.32% 1,785 20.93% 5,815 36.06% 567 36.96% 9,237 30.54%
9/25/2005 1,075 17.87% 1,783 20.80% 5,819 36.15% 561 35.51% 9,238 30.55%
9/26/2005 1,071 17.43% 1,784 20.87% 5,796 35.61% 561 35.51% 9,212 30.19%
9/27/2005 1,079 18.31% 1,774 20.19% 5,790 35.47% 571 37.92% 9,214 30.21%
9/28/2005 1,074 17.76% 1,786 21.00% 5,778 35.19% 571 37.92% 9,209 30.14%
9/29/2005 1,081 18.53% 1,788 21.14% 5,807 35.87% 580 40.10% 9,256 30.81%
9/30/2005 1,085 18.97% 1,803 22.15% 5,815 36.06% 581 40.34% 9,284 31.20%
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
10/1/2005 1,077 18.09% 1,806 22.36% 5,846 36.78% 581 40.34% 9,310 31.57%
10/2/2005 1,077 18.09% 1,811 22.70% 5,843 36.71% 583 40.82% 9,314 31.63%
10/3/2005 1,075 17.87% 1,815 22.97% 5,841 36.66% 585 41.30% 9,316 31.66%
10/4/2005 1,083 18.75% 1,803 22.15% 5,845 36.76% 588 42.03% 9,319 31.70%
10/5/2005 1,095 20.07% 1,794 21.54% 5,859 37.08% 592 43.00% 9,340 32.00%
10/6/2005 1,092 19.74% 1,797 21.75% 5,891 37.83% 594 43.48% 9,374 32.48%
10/7/2005 1,088 19.30% 1,799 21.88% 5,925 38.63% 599 44.69% 9,411 33.00%
10/8/2005 1,096 20.18% 1,810 22.63% 5,999 40.36% 598 44.44% 9,503 34.30%
10/9/2005 1,093 19.85% 1,806 22.36% 6,015 40.73% 599 44.69% 9,513 34.44%
10/10/2005 1,086 19.08% 1,802 22.09% 6,008 40.57% 597 44.20% 9,493 34.16%
10/11/2005 1,102 20.83% 1,800 21.95% 6,004 40.48% 598 44.44% 9,504 34.31%
10/12/2005 1,101 20.72% 1,811 22.70% 6,001 40.41% 594 43.48% 9,507 34.36%
10/13/2005 1,108 21.49% 1,817 23.10% 5,979 39.89% 598 44.44% 9,502 34.28%
10/14/2005 1,108 21.49% 1,833 24.19% 5,986 40.06% 603 45.65% 9,530 34.68%
10/15/2005 1,118 22.59% 1,856 25.75% 6,075 42.14% 601 45.17% 9,650 36.38%
10/16/2005 1,131 24.01% 1,865 26.36% 6,131 43.45% 605 46.14% 9,732 37.54%
10/17/2005 1,134 24.34% 1,879 27.30% 6,156 44.03% 608 46.86% 9,777 38.17%
10/18/2005 1,140 25.00% 1,886 27.78% 6,180 44.60% 612 47.83% 9,818 38.75%
10/19/2005 1,150 26.10% 1,905 29.07% 6,229 45.74% 624 50.72% 9,908 40.02%
10/20/2005 1,151 26.21% 1,924 30.35% 6,291 47.19% 635 53.38% 10,001 41.34%
10/21/2005 1,153 26.43% 1,950 32.11% 6,383 49.34% 639 54.35% 10,125 43.09%
10/22/2005 1,165 27.74% 1,984 34.42% 6,489 51.82% 646 56.04% 10,284 45.34%
10/23/2005 1,168 28.07% 1,994 35.09% 6,509 52.29% 648 56.52% 10,319 45.83%
10/24/2005 1,174 28.73% 2,000 35.50% 6,516 52.46% 646 56.04% 10,336 46.07%
10/25/2005 1,186 30.04% 2,018 36.72% 6,579 53.93% 649 56.76% 10,432 47.43%
10/26/2005 1,201 31.69% 2,052 39.02% 6,649 55.57% 652 57.49% 10,554 49.15%
10/27/2005 1,199 31.47% 2,048 38.75% 6,732 57.51% 655 58.21% 10,634 50.28%
10/28/2005 1,204 32.02% 2,065 39.91% 6,787 58.80% 664 60.39% 10,720 51.50%
10/29/2005 1,219 33.66% 2,091 41.67% 6,902 61.49% 667 61.11% 10,879 53.75%
10/30/2005 1,227 34.54% 2,098 42.14% 6,932 62.19% 670 61.84% 10,927 54.42%
10/31/2005 1,225 34.32% 2,094 41.87% 6,940 62.38% 667 61.11% 10,926 54.41%
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
11/1/2005 1,235 35.42% 2,108 42.82% 6,991 63.57% 667 61.11% 11,001 55.47%
11/2/2005 1,251 37.17% 2,133 44.51% 7,042 64.76% 669 61.59% 11,095 56.80%
11/3/2005 1,260 38.16% 2,158 46.21% 7,083 65.72% 673 62.56% 11,174 57.91%
11/4/2005 1,270 39.25% 2,176 47.43% 7,132 66.87% 679 64.01% 11,257 59.09%
11/5/2005 1,276 39.91% 2,204 49.32% 7,240 69.40% 681 64.49% 11,401 61.12%
11/6/2005 1,275 39.80% 2,214 50.00% 7,271 70.12% 685 65.46% 11,445 61.74%
11/7/2005 1,272 39.47% 2,215 50.07% 7,278 70.29% 684 65.22% 11,449 61.80%
11/8/2005 1,285 40.90% 2,217 50.20% 7,340 71.74% 686 65.70% 11,528 62.92%
11/9/2005 1,287 41.12% 2,233 51.29% 7,393 72.98% 689 66.43% 11,602 63.96%
11/10/2005 1,295 42.00% 2,241 51.83% 7,457 74.47% 698 68.60% 11,691 65.22%
11/11/2005 1,293 41.78% 2,263 53.32% 7,530 76.18% 698 68.60% 11,784 66.53%
11/12/2005 1,295 42.00% 2,284 54.74% 7,616 78.19% 705 70.29% 11,900 68.17%
11/14/2005 1,299 42.43% 2,291 55.22% 7,649 78.97% 709 71.26% 11,948 68.85%
11/15/2005 1,304 42.98% 2,298 55.69% 7,691 79.95% 711 71.74% 12,004 69.64%
11/16/2005 1,300 42.54% 2,291 55.22% 7,617 78.22% 714 72.46% 11,922 68.49%
11/17/2005 1,292 41.67% 2,281 54.54% 7,618 78.24% 716 72.95% 11,907 68.27%
11/18/2005 1,278 40.13% 2,282 54.61% 7,632 78.57% 715 72.71% 11,907 68.27%
11/19/2005 1,282 40.57% 2,278 54.34% 7,657 79.15% 716 72.95% 11,933 68.64%
11/20/2005 1,283 40.68% 2,281 54.54% 7,648 78.94% 716 72.95% 11,928 68.57%
11/21/2005 1,284 40.79% 2,276 54.20% 7,625 78.40% 716 72.95% 11,901 68.19%
11/22/2005 1,279 40.24% 2,271 53.86% 7,574 77.21% 712 71.98% 11,836 67.27%
11/23/2005 1,279 40.24% 2,271 53.86% 7,574 77.21% 712 71.98% 11,836 67.27%
11/24/2005 1,272 39.47% 2,264 53.39% 7,564 76.98% 712 71.98% 11,812 66.93%
11/25/2005 1,265 38.71% 2,258 52.98% 7,528 76.13% 711 71.74% 11,762 66.22%
11/26/2005 1,262 38.38% 2,252 52.57% 7,536 76.32% 707 70.77% 11,757 66.15%
11/27/2005 1,264 38.60% 2,242 51.90% 7,531 76.20% 710 71.50% 11,747 66.01%
11/28/2005 1,259 38.05% 2,236 51.49% 7,516 75.85% 707 70.77% 11,718 65.60%
11/29/2005 1,266 38.82% 2,225 50.75% 7,470 74.78% 698 68.60% 11,659 64.77%
11/30/2005 1,260 38.16% 2,216 50.14% 7,450 74.31% 690 66.67% 11,616 64.16%
           
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
12/1/2005 1,241 36.07% 2,186 48.10% 7,334 71.60% 687 65.94% 11,448 61.79%
12/2/2005 1,229 34.76% 2,181 47.76% 7,352 72.02% 689 66.53% 11,451 61.83%
12/3/2005 1,225 34.32% 2,189 48.31% 7,408 73.33% 691 66.91% 11,513 62.70%
12/4/2005 1,235 35.42% 2,181 47.76% 7,410 73.37% 692 67.15% 11,518 62.78%
12/5/2005 1,228 34.65% 2,176 47.43% 7,403 73.21% 686 65.70% 11,493 62.42%
12/6/2005 1,222 33.99% 2,153 45.87% 7,402 73.19% 680 64.25% 11,457 61.91%
12/7/2005 1,229 34.76% 2,161 46.41% 7,366 72.34% 673 62.56% 11,429 61.52%
12/8/2005 1,227 34.54% 2,154 45.93% 7,314 71.13% 666 60.87% 11,361 60.56%
12/9/2005 1,229 34.76% 2,165 46.68% 7,309 71.01% 666 60.87% 11,369 60.67%
12/10/2005 1,225 34.32% 2,168 46.88% 7,320 71.27% 654 57.97% 11,367 60.64%
12/11/2005 1,219 33.66% 2,160 46.34% 7,302 70.85% 653 57.73% 11,334 60.18%
12/12/2005 1,218 33.55% 2,153 45.87% 7,285 70.45% 650 57.00% 11,306 59.78%
12/13/2005 1,216 33.33% 2,135 44.65% 7,242 69.44% 647 56.28% 11,240 58.85%
12/14/2005 1,216 33.33% 2,110 42.95% 7,217 68.86% 644 55.56% 11,187 58.10%
12/16/2005 1,196 31.14% 2,078 40.79% 7,130 66.82% 643 55.31% 11,047 56.12%
12/17/2005 1,201 31.69% 2,069 40.18% 7,085 65.77% 645 55.80% 11,000 55.46%
12/18/2005 1,204 32.02% 2,056 39.30% 7,066 65.33% 647 56.28% 10,973 55.07%
12/19/2005 1,205 32.13% 2,051 38.96% 7,044 64.81% 646 56.04% 10,946 54.69%
12/20/2005 1,197 31.25% 2,031 37.60% 6,985 63.43% 638 54.11% 10,851 53.35%
12/21/2005 1,189 30.37% 2,012 36.31% 6,908 61.63% 633 52.90% 10,742 51.81%
12/22/2005 1,187 30.15% 1,983 34.35% 6,831 59.83% 627 51.45% 10,628 50.20%
12/23/2005 1,175 28.84% 1,957 32.59% 6,773 58.47% 622 50.24% 10,527 48.77%
12/26/2005 1,164 27.63% 1,943 31.64% 6,677 56.22% 613 48.07% 10,397 46.93%
12/27/2005 1,156 26.75% 1,935 31.10% 6,654 55.69% 609 47.10% 10,354 46.33%
12/28/2005 1,141 25.11% 1,906 29.13% 6,629 55.10% 601 45.17% 10,277 45.24%
12/29/2005 1,132 24.12% 1,889 27.98% 6,563 53.56% 597 44.20% 10,181 43.88%
12/30/2005 1,123 23.14% 1,884 27.64% 6,561 53.51% 598 44.44% 10,166 43.67%
12/31/2005 1,110 21.71% 1,869 26.63% 6,497 52.01% 585 41.30% 10,061 42.18%
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
1/1/2006 1,074 17.76% 1,782 20.73% 6,256 46.37% 564 36.23% 9,676 36.74%
1/2/2006 1,075 17.87% 1,772 20.05% 6,245 46.12% 560 35.27% 9,652 36.40%
1/3/2006 1,085 18.97% 1,785 20.93% 6,263 46.54% 565 36.47% 9,698 37.05%
1/4/2006 1,097 20.29% 1,809 22.56% 6,326 48.01% 564 36.23% 9,796 38.44%
1/5/2006 1,105 21.16% 1,833 24.19% 6,367 48.97% 568 37.20% 9,873 39.53%
1/6/2006 1,113 22.04% 1,844 24.93% 6,441 50.70% 575 38.89% 9,973 40.94%
1/7/2006 1,133 24.23% 1,860 26.02% 6,545 53.14% 576 39.13% 10,114 42.93%
1/8/2006 1,131 24.01% 1,864 26.29% 6,553 53.32% 579 39.86% 10,127 43.12%
1/9/2006 1,129 23.79% 1,860 26.02% 6,557 53.42% 581 40.34% 10,127 43.12%
1/11/2006 1,139 24.89% 1,863 26.22% 6,628 55.08% 595 43.72% 10,225 44.50%
1/12/2006 1,157 26.86% 1,903 28.93% 6,770 58.40% 605 46.14% 10,435 47.47%
1/13/2006 1,160 27.19% 1,925 30.42% 6,791 58.89% 607 46.62% 10,483 48.15%
1/14/2006 1,168 28.07% 1,960 32.79% 6,867 60.67% 605 46.14% 10,600 49.80%
1/15/2006 1,163 27.52% 1,959 32.72% 6,850 60.27% 602 45.41% 10,574 49.43%
1/16/2006 1,162 27.41% 1,946 31.84% 6,850 60.27% 599 44.69% 10,557 49.19%
1/17/2006 1,163 27.52% 1,949 32.05% 6,863 60.58% 600 44.93% 10,575 49.45%
1/18/2006 1,156 26.75% 1,947 31.91% 6,827 59.73% 602 45.41% 10,532 48.84%
1/19/2006 1,169 28.18% 1,941 31.50% 6,837 59.97% 615 48.55% 10,562 49.27%
1/20/2006 1,172 28.51% 1,958 32.66% 6,868 60.69% 617 49.03% 10,615 50.01%
1/21/2006 1,166 27.85% 1,970 33.47% 6,912 61.72% 613 48.07% 10,661 50.66%
1/22/2006 1,177 29.06% 1,960 32.79% 6,937 62.31% 611 47.58% 10,685 51.00%
1/23/2006 1,147 25.77% 1,942 31.57% 6,901 61.46% 607 46.62% 10,597 49.76%
1/24/2006 1,155 26.64% 1,932 30.89% 6,855 60.39% 588 42.03% 10,530 48.81%
1/25/2006 1,172 28.51% 1,945 31.78% 6,821 59.59% 589 42.27% 10,527 48.77%
1/26/2006 1,150 26.10% 1,935 31.10% 6,835 59.92% 583 40.82% 10,503 48.43%
1/27/2006 1,163 27.52% 1,962 32.93% 6,983 63.38% 595 43.72% 10,703 51.26%
1/28/2006 1,174 28.73% 1,979 34.08% 7,015 64.13% 593 43.24% 10,761 52.08%
1/29/2006 1,178 29.17% 1,975 33.81% 7,019 64.23% 596 43.96% 10,768 52.18%
1/30/2006 1,180 29.39% 1,968 33.33% 6,993 63.62% 594 43.48% 10,735 51.71%
1/31/2006 1,182 29.61% 1,958 32.66% 6,959 62.82% 594 43.48% 10,693 51.12%
           
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
2/1/2006 1,173 28.62% 1,949 32.05% 6,861 60.53% 596 43.96% 10,579 49.51%
2/2/2006 1,164 27.63% 1,980 34.15% 6,893 61.28% 603 45.65% 10,640 50.37%
2/3/2006 1,173 28.62% 1,992 34.96% 6,911 61.70% 603 45.65% 10,679 50.92%
2/4/2006 1,189 30.37% 2,026 37.23% 6,940 62.38% 614 48.19% 10,768 52.18%
2/5/2006 1,183 29.66% 2,037 38.01% 6,936 62.27% 615 48.43% 10,770 52.20%
2/6/2006 1,180 29.33% 2,038 38.08% 6,932 62.19% 612 47.71% 10,761 52.08%
2/7/2006 1,183 29.66% 2,043 38.41% 6,903 61.51% 613 48.07% 10,742 51.80%
2/8/2006 1,185 29.88% 2,043 38.41% 6,902 61.49% 618 49.28% 10,748 51.89%
2/9/2006 1,157 26.86% 2,065 39.91% 7,092 65.93% 628 51.69% 10,942 54.64%
2/10/2006 1,171 28.40% 2,084 41.19% 7,116 66.50% 629 51.93% 11,000 55.46%
2/11/2006 1,174 28.73% 2,115 43.29% 7,195 68.34% 625 50.97% 11,109 57.00%
2/12/2006 1,176 28.95% 2,114 43.22% 7,202 68.51% 622 50.24% 11,114 57.07%
2/13/2006 1,194 30.92% 2,105 42.62% 7,138 67.01% 618 49.28% 11,055 56.23%
2/14/2006 1,204 32.02% 2,104 42.55% 7,169 67.74% 622 50.24% 11,099 56.85%
2/15/2006 1,196 31.14% 2,095 41.94% 7,165 67.64% 623 50.48% 11,079 56.57%
2/16/2006 1,191 30.59% 2,099 42.21% 7,152 67.34% 630 52.17% 11,072 56.47%
2/17/2006 1,198 31.36% 2,114 43.22% 7,174 67.85% 629 51.93% 11,115 57.08%
2/18/2006 1,205 32.13% 2,146 45.39% 7,209 68.67% 638 54.11% 11,198 58.25%
2/20/2006 1,203 31.91% 2,144 45.26% 7,225 69.05% 640 54.59% 11,212 58.45%
2/21/2006 1,217 33.44% 2,156 46.07% 7,295 70.68% 647 56.28% 11,315 59.91%
2/22/2006 1,209 32.57% 2,148 45.53% 7,299 70.78% 640 54.59% 11,296 59.64%
2/23/2006 1,208 32.46% 2,165 46.68% 7,328 71.46% 645 55.80% 11,346 60.34%
2/24/2006 1,214 33.11% 2,164 46.61% 7,321 71.29% 651 57.25% 11,350 60.40%
2/25/2006 1,222 33.99% 2,179 47.63% 7,362 72.25% 657 58.70% 11,420 61.39%
2/26/2006 1,225 34.32% 2,176 47.43% 7,367 72.37% 656 58.45% 11,424 61.45%
2/27/2006 1,225 32.32% 2,176 47.43% 7,337 71.67% 651 57.25% 11,389 60.95%
2/28/2006 1,236 35.53% 2,167 46.82% 7,300 70.80% 642 55.07% 11,345 60.33%
           
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
3/1/2006 1,205 32.13% 2,133 44.51% 7,157 67.45% 631 52.42% 11,126 57.24%
3/2/2006 1,216 33.33% 2,153 45.87% 7,168 67.71% 633 52.90% 11,170 57.86%
3/3/2006 1,219 33.66% 2,163 46.54% 7,188 68.18% 637 53.86% 11,207 58.38%
3/4/2006 1,213 33.00% 2,190 48.37% 7,255 69.75% 640 54.59% 11,298 59.67%
3/5/2006 1,215 33.22% 2,194 48.64% 7,259 69.84% 641 54.83% 11,309 59.82%
3/6/2006 1,210 32.68% 2,191 48.44% 7,242 69.44% 642 55.07% 11,285 59.48%
3/7/2006 1,209 32.57% 2,201 49.12% 7,211 68.72% 648 56.52% 11,269 59.26%
3/8/2006 1,210 32.68% 2,211 49.80% 7,202 68.51% 651 57.25% 11,274 59.33%
3/9/2006 1,224 34.21% 2,242 51.90% 7,370 72.44% 665 60.63% 11,501 65.54%
3/10/2006 1,213 33.00% 2,221 50.47% 7,221 68.95% 652 57.49% 11,307 59.79%
3/11/2006 1,221 33.88% 2,234 51.36% 7,300 70.80% 646 56.04% 11,401 61.12%
3/12/2006 1,217 33.44% 2,240 51.76% 7,305 70.92% 644 55.56% 11,406 61.19%
3/13/2006 1,212 32.89% 2,236 51.49% 7,290 70.57% 648 56.52% 11,386 60.91%
3/14/2006 1,203 31.91% 2,223 50.61% 7,280 70.33% 650 57.00% 11,356 60.49%
3/15/2006 1,202 31.80% 2,234 51.36% 7,279 70.31% 657 58.70% 11,372 60.71%
3/16/2006 1,191 30.59% 2,218 50.27% 7,289 70.54% 653 57.73% 11,351 60.42%
3/17/2006 1,187 30.15% 2,232 51.22% 7,305 70.92% 654 57.97% 11,378 60.80%
3/18/2006 1,184 29.82% 2,253 52.64% 7,368 72.39% 648 56.62% 11,453 61.86%
3/19/2006 1,181 29.50% 2,260 53.12% 7,370 72.44% 646 56.04% 11,457 61.91%
3/20/2006 1,179 29.28% 2,255 52.78% 7,368 72.39% 648 56.52% 11,450 61.81%
3/21/2006 1,176 28.95% 2,242 51.90% 7,352 72.02% 647 56.28% 11,417 61.35%
3/22/2006 1,166 27.85% 2,238 51.63% 7,367 72.37% 656 58.45% 11,427 61.49%
3/23/2006 1,170 28.29% 2,251 52.51% 7,381 72.70% 661 59.66% 11,463 62.00%
3/24/2006 1,177 29.06% 2,267 53.59% 7,404 73.23% 666 60.87% 11,514 62.72%
3/25/2006 1,179 29.28% 2,296 55.56% 7,469 74.75% 665 60.63% 11,609 64.06%
3/26/2006 1,178 29.17% 2,289 55.08% 7,470 74.78% 664 60.39% 11,601 63.95%
3/27/2006 1,174 28.73% 2,284 54.74% 7,446 74.22% 664 60.39% 11,568 63.48%
3/28/2006 1,177 29.06% 2,294 55.42% 7,430 73.84% 670 61.84% 11,571 63.52%
3/29/2006 1,178 29.17% 2,292 55.28% 7,413 73.44% 676 63.29% 11,559 63.36%
3/30/2006 1,176 28.95% 2,289 55.08% 7,435 73.96% 672 62.32% 11,572 63.54%
3/31/2006 1,175 28.84% 2,284 54.74% 7,426 73.75% 670 61.84% 11,555 63.30%
           
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
4/1/2006 1,176 28.95% 2,276 54.20% 7,453 74.38% 666 60.87% 11,571 63.52%
4/2/2006 1,170 28.29% 2,289 55.08% 7,445 74.19% 668 61.35% 11,572 63.54%
4/3/2006 1,168 28.07% 2,283 54.67% 7,454 74.40% 676 63.29% 11,581 63.67%
4/4/2006 1,182 29.61% 2,282 54.61% 7,487 75.18% 671 62.08% 11,622 64.25%
4/5/2006 1,188 30.26% 2,287 54.95% 7,526 76.09% 678 63.77% 11,679 65.05%
4/6/2006 1,189 30.37% 2,302 55.96% 7,554 76.74% 679 64.01% 11,724 65.69%
4/7/2006 1.189 30.37% 2.306 56.23% 7,549 76.63% 686 65.70% 11,730 65.77%
4/8/2006 1,199 31.47% 2,371 60.64% 7,618 78.24% 693 67.39% 11,881 67.91%
4/9/2006 1,201 31.69% 2,369 60.50% 7,615 78.17% 693 67.39% 11,878 67.86%
4/10/2006 1,197 31.25% 2,375 60.91% 7,601 77.84% 692 67.15% 11,865 67.68%
4/11/2006 1,205 32.13% 2,368 60.43% 7,596 77.73% 692 67.15% 11,861 67.62%
4/12/2006 1,214 33.11% 2,358 59.76% 7,640 78.76% 693 67.39% 11,905 68.24%
4/13/2006 1,213 33.00% 2,379 61.18% 7,628 78.47% 694 67.63% 11,914 68.37%
4/14/2006 1,216 33.33% 2,389 61.86% 7,643 78.83% 692 67.15% 11,940 68.74%
4/15/2006 1,222 33.99% 2,404 62.87% 7,685 79.81% 700 69.08% 12,011 69.74%
4/16/2006 1,226 34.43% 2,392 62.06% 7,657 79.15% 698 68.60% 11,973 69.21%
4/17/2006 1,225 34.32% 2,389 61.86% 7,654 79.08% 697 68.36% 11,965 69.09%
4/18/2006 1,239 35.86% 2,407 63.08% 7,708 80.35% 699 68.84% 12,053 70.34%
4/19/2006 1,253 37.39% 2,417 63.75% 7,741 81.12% 703 69.81% 12,114 71.20%
4/20/2006 1,259 38.05% 2,438 65.18% 7,783 82.10% 706 70.53% 12,186 72.22%
4/21/2006 1,280 40.35% 2,445 65.65% 7,814 82.83% 710 71.50% 12,249 73.11%
4/22/2006 1,295 42.00% 2,470 67.34% 7,911 85.10% 712 71.98% 12,388 75.07%
4/23/2006 1,293 41.78% 2,486 68.43% 7,917 85.24% 714 72.46% 12,410 75.38%
4/24/2006 1,291 41.56% 2,482 68.16% 7,902 84.89% 710 71.50% 12,385 75.03%
4/25/2006 1,294 41.89% 2,475 67.68% 7,913 85.14% 706 70.53% 12,388 75.07%
4/26/2006 1,305 43.09% 2,480 68.02% 7,956 86.15% 710 71.50% 12,451 75.96%
4/27/2006 1,302 42.76% 2,488 68.56% 7,961 86.27% 708 71.01% 12,459 76.07%
4/28/2006 1,318 44.52% 2,503 69.58% 8,032 87.93% 730 76.33% 12,583 77.83%
4/29/2006 1,319 44.63% 2,532 71.54% 8,129 90.20% 734 77.29% 12,714 79.68%
4/30/2006 1,329 45.72% 2,546 72.49% 8,138 90.41% 732 76.81% 12,745 80.12%
           
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
5/1/2006 1,322 44.96% 2,517 70.53% 8,060 88.58% 718 73.43% 12,617 78.31%
5/2/2006 1,337 46.60% 2,546 72.49% 8,073 88.89% 733 77.05% 12,689 79.32%
5/3/2006 1,336 46.49% 2,566 73.85% 8,136 90.36% 738 78.26% 12,776 80.55%
5/4/2006 1,345 47.48% 2,582 74.93% 8,198 91.81% 745 79.95% 12,870 81.88%
5/5/2006 1,353 48.36% 2,606 76.56% 8,289 93.94% 751 81.40% 12,999 83.71%
5/6/2006 1,382 51.54% 2,658 80.08% 8,412 96.82% 761 83.82% 13,213 86.73%
5/7/2006 1,388 52.19% 2,660 80.22% 8,429 97.22% 762 84.06% 13,239 87.10%
5/8/2006 1,390 52.41% 2,658 80.08% 8,420 97.01% 765 84.78% 13,233 87.01%
5/9/2006 1,407 54.28% 2,676 81.30% 8,438 97.43% 764 84.54% 13,285 87.75%
5/10/2006 1,418 55.48% 2,695 82.59% 8,424 97.10% 786 89.86% 13,323 88.28%
5/11/2006 1,408 54.39% 2,701 82.99% 8,420 97.01% 790 90.82% 13,319 88.23%
5/12/2006 1,417 55.37% 2,713 83.81% 8,505 98.99% 791 91.06% 13,426 89.74%
5/13/2006 1,436 57.46% 2,748 86.18% 8,645 102.27% 794 91.79% 13,623 92.52%
5/14/2006 1,442 58.11% 2,748 86.18% 8,661 102.64% 798 92.75% 13,649 92.89%
5/15/2006 1,431 56.91% 2,739 85.57% 8,651 102.41% 798 92.75% 13,619 92.47%
5/16/2006 1,440 57.89% 2,748 86.18% 8,658 102.57% 800 93.24% 13,646 92.85%
5/17/2006 1,443 58.22% 2,746 86.04% 8,680 103.09% 817 97.34% 13,686 93.41%
5/18/2006 1,451 59.10% 2,765 87.33% 8,753 104.80% 829 100.24% 13,798 95.00%
5/19/2006 1,462 60.31% 2,786 88.75% 8,826 106.50% 835 101.69% 13,909 96.57%
5/20/2006 1,476 61.84% 2,823 91.26% 8,990 110.34% 841 103.14% 14,130 99.69%
5/21/2006 1,482 62.50% 2,830 91.73% 9,028 111.23% 840 102.90% 14,180 100.40%
5/22/2006 1,480 62.28% 2,824 91.33% 8,994 110.44% 840 102.90% 14,138 99.80%
5/23/2006 1,496 64.04% 2,822 91.19% 8,982 110.15% 844 103.86% 14,144 99.89%
5/24/2006 1,523 67.00% 2,874 94.72% 9,162 114.37% 864 108.70% 14,423 103.83%
5/25/2006 1,527 67.73% 2,885 95.46% 9,167 114.48% 872 110.63% 14,451 104.23%
5/26/2006 1,533 68.09% 2,901 96.54% 9,219 115.70% 879 112.32% 14,532 105.37%
5/27/2006 1,553 70.29% 2,949 99.80% 9,314 117.92% 878 112.08% 14,694 107.66%
5/29/2006 1,555 70.50% 2,943 99.39% 9,305 117.71% 874 111.11% 14,677 107.42%
5/30/2006 1,560 71.05% 2,944 99.46% 9,303 117.66% 873 110.87% 14,680 107.46%
5/31/2006 1,593 74.67% 3,016 104.34% 9,328 118.25% 885 113.77% 14,822 109.47%
           
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
6/1/2006 1,578 73.03% 2,979 101.83% 9,422 120.45% 892 115.46% 14,871 110.16%
6/2/2006 1,584 73.68% 3,002 103.39% 9,513 122.58% 900 117.39% 14,999 111.97%
6/3/2006 1,606 76.10% 3,043 106.17% 9,674 126.35% 904 118.36% 15,227 115.19%
6/5/2006 1,607 76.21% 3,046 106.37% 9,674 126.35% 911 120.05% 15,238 115.35%
6/6/2006 1,616 77.19% 3,049 106.57% 9,688 126.67% 910 119.81% 15,263 115.70%
6/7/2006 1,617 77.30% 3,036 105.69% 9,712 127.23% 923 122.95% 15,288 116.05%
6/8/2006 1,613 76.86% 3,051 106.71% 9,727 127.59% 920 122.22% 15,311 116.38%
6/9/2006 1,617 77.30% 3,069 107.93% 9,799 129.27% 926 123.67% 15,411 117.79%
6/10/2006 1,631 78.84% 3,114 110.98% 9,891 131.42% 934 125.60% 15,570 120.04%
6/12/2006 1,638 79.61% 3.120 111.38% 9,886 131.31% 939 126.81% 15,583 120.22%
6/13/2006 1,635 79.28% 3,130 112.06% 9,880 131.17% 944 128.02% 15,589 120.31%
6/14/2006 1,633 79.06% 3,129 111.99% 9,885 131.28% 942 127.54% 15,589 120.31%
6/15/2006 1,635 79.28% 3,149 113.35% 9,995 132.92% 943 127.78% 15,682 121.62%
6/16/2006 1,623 77.96% 3,144 113.01% 10,015 134.32% 942 127.54% 15,724 122.22%
6/17/2006 1,634 79.17% 3,182 115.58% 10,103 136.38% 946 128.50% 15,865 124.21%
6/18/2006 1,634 79.17% 3,181 115.51% 10,107 136.48% 948 128.99% 15,870 124.28%
6/20/2006 1,644 80.26% 3,184 115.72% 10,091 136.10% 947 128.74% 15,866 124.22%
6/21/2006 1,662 82.24% 3,183 115.65% 10,097 136.24% 953 130.19% 15,895 124.63%
6/22/2006 1,669 83.00% 3,209 117.41% 10,131 137.04% 957 131.16% 15,966 125.64%
6/23/2006 1,686 84.87% 3,228 118.70% 10,210 138.89% 957 131.16% 16,081 127.26%
6/24/2006 1,697 86.07% 3,264 121.14% 10,337 141.86% 955 130.68% 16,253 129.69%
6/25/2006 1,698 86.18% 3,267 121.37% 10,350 142.16% 954 130.43% 16,269 129.92%
6/26/2006 1,694 85.75% 3,263 121.07% 10,354 142.26% 950 129.47% 16,261 129.80%
6/27/2006 1,709 87.39% 3,246 119.92% 10,372 142.68% 954 130.43% 16,281 130.09%
6/28/2006 1,709 87.39% 3,236 119.24% 10,382 142.91% 955 130.68% 16,282 130.10%
6/29/2006 1,705 86.95% 3,250 120.19% 10,379 142.84% 958 131.40% 16,292 130.24%
6/30/2006 1,705 86.95% 3,254 120.46% 10,412 143.61% 958 131.40% 16,329 130.77%
           
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
7/2/2006 1,700 86.40% 3,263 121.07% 10,420 143.80% 957 131.16% 16,340 130.92%
7/3/2006 1,699 86.29% 3,262 121.00% 10,413 143.64% 953 130.19% 16,327 130.74%
7/5/2006 1,705 86.95% 3,249 120.12% 10,397 143.26% 949 129.23% 16,300 130.36%
7/6/2006 1,731 89.80% 3,248 120.05% 10,417 143.73% 955 130.68% 16,351 131.08%
7/7/2006 1,727 89.36% 3,263 121.07% 10,462 144.78% 969 134.06% 16,421 132.07%
7/8/2006 1,761 93.09% 3,278 122.09% 10,589 147.75% 974 135.27% 16,602 134.62%
7/10/2006 1,764 93.42% 3,283 122.43% 10,611 148.27% 979 136.47% 16,637 135.12%
7/11/2006 1,771 94.19% 3,282 122.36% 10,596 147.92% 980 136.71% 16,629 135.01%
7/12/2006 1,768 93.86% 3,274 121.82% 10,624 148.57% 986 138.16% 16,652 135.33%
7/14/2006 1,779 95.07% 3,308 124.12% 10,691 150.14% 987 138.41% 16,765 136.93%
7/15/2006 1,777 94.85% 3,342 126.42% 10,792 152.50% 995 140.34% 16,906 138.82%
7/16/2006 1,780 95.18% 3,347 126.76% 10,797 152.62% 992 139.61% 16,916 139.06%
7/17/2006 1,776 94.74% 3,336 126.02% 10,796 152.60% 991 139.37% 16,899 138.82%
7/19/2006 1,823 99.89% 3,374 128.59% 10,955 156.32% 1,017 145.65% 17,169 142.64%
7/20/2006 1,820 99.56% 3,373 128.52% 11,010 157.60% 1,019 146.14% 17,222 143.39%
7/21/2006 1,819 99.45% 3,376 128.73% 10,996 157.28% 1,024 147.34% 17,215 143.29%
7/22/2006 1,823 99.89% 3,412 131.17% 11,084 159.34% 1,017 145.65% 17,336 145.00%
7/24/2006 1,819 99.45% 3,416 131.44% 11,080 159.24% 1,022 146.86% 17,337 145.01%
7/25/2006 1,824 100.00% 3,449 133.67% 11,049 158.52% 1,025 147.58% 17,347 145.15%
7/26/2006 1,840 101.75% 3,491 136.52% 11,231 162.77% 1,047 152.90% 17,609 148.86%
7/27/2006 1,848 102.63% 3,513 138.01% 11,288 164.11% 1,050 153.62% 17,699 150.13%
7/31/2006 1,874 105.48% 3,511 137.87% 11,352 165.61% 1,043 151.93% 17,780 151.27%
           
El Dorado Placer Sacramento Yolo Total
           
8/3/2006 1,857 103.62% 3,520 138.48% 11,333 165.16% 1,060 156.04% 17,770 151.13%
8/4/2006 1,858 103.73% 3,521 138.55% 11,369 166.00% 1,055 154.83% 17,803 151.60%
8/5/2006 1,866 104.61% 3,540 139.84% 11,499 169.05% 1,052 154.11% 17,957 153.77%
8/6/2006 1,864 104.39% 3,545 140.18% 11,514 169.40% 1,052 154.11% 17,975 154.03%
8/7/2006 1,859 103.84% 3,532 139.30% 11,490 168.83% 1,049 153.38% 17,930 153.39%
8/8/2006 1,865 104.50% 3,536 139.57% 11,473 168.44% 1,049 153.38% 17,923 153.29%
8/9/2006 1,860 103.95% 3,529 139.09% 11,473 168.44% 1,066 157.49% 17,928 153.36%
8/10/2006 1,859 103.84% 3,536 139.57% 11,496 168.98% 1,066 157.49% 17,957 153.77%
8/11/2006 1,871 105.15% 3,535 139.50% 11,499 169.05% 1,069 158.21% 17,974 154.01%
8/12/2006 1,883 106.47% 3,574 142.14% 11,593 171.24% 1,068 157.97% 18,118 156.05%
8/13/2006 1,878 105.92% 3,580 142.55% 11,584 171.03% 1,063 156.76% 18,105 155.86%
8/14/2006 1,872 105.26% 3,571 141.94% 11,568 170.66% 1,059 155.80% 18,070 155.37%
8/16/2006 1,872 105.26% 3,528 139.02% 11,501 169.09% 1,055 154.83% 17,956 153.76%
8/17/2006 1,876 105.70% 3,531 139.23% 11,541 170.03% 1,045 152.42% 17,993 154.28%
8/19/2006 1,871 105.15% 3,526 138.89% 11,557 170.40% 1,037 150.48% 17,991 154.25%
8/21/2006 1,866 104.61% 3,535 139.50% 11,555 170.35% 1,034 149.76% 17,990 154.24%
8/23/2006 1,849 102.74% 3,517 138.28% 11,505 169.19% 1,038 150.72% 17,909 153.09%
8/25/2006 1,845 102.30% 3,498 136.99% 11,517 169.47% 1,037 150.48% 17,901 152.98%
8/26/2006 1,841 101.86% 3,495 136.79% 11,514 169.40% 1,041 151.45% 17,891 152.84%

Note:  Daily Numbers from IDXCentral.com




Population Growth Versus # of Homes Available for Sale

This next set of data is trying to show the relationship between the total number of people in a given area to the number of homes for sale in that area.  This allows us to compare number of homes for sale today to the number of homes for at some time in the past on a population adjusted basis.

 (This is only one of many factors that may be considered for comparative purposes, such as Incomes, Job Growth, Home Prices versus Rent ratios, Inflation, etc).

 

  El Dorado County Placer County Sacramento County Yolo County Total
Year Popu- lation # Homes Pop/ Home Popu- lation # Homes Pop/ Home Popu- lation # Homes Pop/ Home Popu- lation # Homes Pop/ Home Popu- lation # Homes Pop/ Home
                               
1990 125,995     172,796     1,041,219     141,210     1,481,220    
1991 130,182     179,242     1,063,417     143,825     1,516,666    
1992 134,898     187,204     1,088,351     147,211     1,557,664    
5/31/1993 138,788     194,001     1,103,845     149,032     1,585,666 11,604 137
4/30/1994 141,843 1,395 102 199,994 1,682 119 1,113,762 6,739 165 150,387 628 239 1,605,986 10,444 154
4/30/1995 143,862 1,400 103 207,158 1,700 122 1,118,579 6,600 169 152,924 628 244 1,622,523 10,328 157
4/30/1996 145,949 1,400 104 215,019 1,675 128 1,127,700 5,800 194 155,709 615 253 1,644,377 9,490 173
4/30/1997 148,373 1,350 110 222,287 1,600 139 1,141,918 5,400 211 158,310 615 257 1,670,888 8,965 186
4/30/1998 150,857 1,150 131 229,684 1,200 191 1,157,437 4,400 263 160,732 615 261 1,698,710 7,365 231
4/30/1999 153,231 1,000 153 238,292 1,100 217 1,185,124 4,000 296 163,490 200 817 1,740,137 6,300 276
4/30/2000 157,079 650 242 246,119 800 308 1,217,628 2,800 435 167,352 100 1,674 1,788,178 4,350 411
4/30/2001 161,600 650 249 254,900 1,000 255 1,247,800 2,800 446 171,800 50 3,436 1,836,100 4,500 408
4/30/2002 163,600 650 252 265,700 1,025 259 1,280,900 2,250 569 176,300 50 3,526 1,886,500 3,975 475
4/30/2003 165,900 650 255 283,500 1,050 270 1,311,700 2,300 570 181,100 225 805 1,942,200 4,225 460
4/30/2004 170,456 625 273 296,579 650 456 1,346,205 1,700 792 184,660 200 923 1,997,900 3,175 629
4/30/2005 173,511 594 292 308,431 1,070 288 1,366,937 2,545 537 187,575 214 877 2,036,454 4,423 460
5/31/2005 173,511     308,431     1,366,937     187,575     2,036,454 5,290 385
6/30/2005 173,511     308,431     1,366,937     187,575     2,036,454 6,246 326
7/31/2005 173,511     308,431     1,366,937     187,575     2,036,454 7,263 280
8/31/2005 173,511 989 175 308,431 1,619 191 1,366,937 5,082 269 187,575 463 405 2,036,454 8,153 250
9/30/2005 173,511 1,085 160 308,431 1,803 171 1,366,937 5,815 235 187,575 581 323 2,036,454 9,284 219
10/31/2005 173,511 1,225 142 308,431 2,094 147 1,366,937 6,940 197 187,575 667 281 2,036,454 10,926 186
11/30/2005 173,511 1,260 138 308,431 2,216 139 1,366,937 7,450 183 187,575 690 272 2,036,454 11,616 175
12/31/2005 173,511 1,110 156 308,431 1,869 165 1,366,937 6,497 210 187,575 585 321 2,036,454 10,061 202
1/31/2006 176,204 1,182 149 316,508 1,958 162 1,385,607 6,959 199 190,344 594 320 2,068,663 10,693 193
2/28/2006 176,204 1,236 143 316,508 2,167 146 1,385,607 7,300 190 190,344 642 296 2,068,663 11,345 182
3/31/2006 176,204 1,175 150 316,508 2,284 139 1,385,607 7,426 187 190,344 670 284 2,068,663 11,555 179
4/30/2006 176,204 1,329 133 316,508 2,546 124 1,385,607 8,138 170 190,344 732 260 2,068,663 12,745 162
5/31/2006 176,204 1,593 111 316,508 3,016 105 1,385,607 9,328 149 190,344 885 215 2,068,663 14,822 140
6/30/2006 176,204 1,705 103 316,508 3,254 97 1,385,607 10,412 133 190,344 958 199 2,068,663 16,329 127
7/31/2006 176,204 1,874 94 316,508 3,511 90 1,385,607 11,352 122 190,344 1,043 182 2,068,663 17,780 116
Notes:
  • Population Data was pulled from the California Employment Development Department.
  • 1990 data courtesy of the US Census Bureau.
  • 1991-2005 data courtesy of the California Department of Finance.
  • 2006 estimated.
  • 6/30/2006 --- 2005 and 2006 population numbers revised according to updates on EDD's website.



Sacramento County Foreclosure Data

Beginning 8/10/2005

(Sacramento County Only)

Date Foreclosure Pre-Foreclosure Bankruptcy
8/10/2005 29 3,045 1,243
8/20/2005 28 3,128 1,286
8/25/2005 30 3,091 3,294
9/3/2005 32 3,201 4,182
9/10/2005 33 3,268 4,264
9/17/2005 36 3,313 4,300
9/24/2005 37 3,367 2,553
10/1/2005 36 3,450 1,768
10/8/2005 34 2,461 733
10/15/2005 42 3,556 1,868
10/22/2005 43 3,609 2,165
10/29/2005 46 3,722 2,961
11/5/2005 46 3,813 3,102
11/12/2005 48 3,525 3,128
11/19/2005 50 3,556 3,121
11/26/2005 52 3,485 3,093
12/3/2005 53 3,496 3,036
12/10/2005 52 3,468 3,014
12/17/2005 58 3,463 3,006
12/24/2005 58 3,484 3,001
12/31/2005 60 3,508 2,989
1/7/2006 61 3,548 2,923
1/14/2006
1/21/2006 66 3,465 2,546
1/28/2006 69 3,410 2,230
2/4/2006 77 3,448 2,256
2/11/2006 77 3,474 1,917
2/18/2006 75 3,595 1,809
2/25/2006 87 3,602 1,592
3/04/2006 91 3,643 1,302
3/11/2006 99 3,691 1,375
3/18/2006 88 3,773 1,424
3/25/2006 99 3,828 1,210
4/1/2006 98 3,858 1,030
4/8/2006 106 3,900 1,014
4/15/2006 109 3,974 998
4/22/2006 109 4,040 1,011
4/29/2006 119 4,111 1,022
5/6/2006 125 4,174 984
5/13/2006 130 4,232 1000
5/20/2006 136 4,254 1,012
5/27/2006 148 4,362 1,061
6/3/2006 154 4,410 1,105
6/10/2006 164 4,434 1,114
6/17/2006 180 4,610 1,118
6/24/2006 191 4,682 1,131
7/1/2006 203 4,685 1,143
7/8/2006 212 4,753 1,180
7/15/2006 225 4,747 1,154
7/22/2006 228 2,910 1,166
7/29/2006 239 2,927 1,162
8/5/2006 247 2,960 1,200
8/12/2006 261 2,968 1,219
8/19/2006 267 2,937 1,225
8/26/2006 281 2,948 1,228
Notes:
  • Data courtesy of Foreclosure.com.
  • Data is for Sacramento County only (not the 4 county region).



Job Growth in the Four County Region from 1994-2004
Things to notice:
1) Steady decline in job growth after a peak in 1999.
2) High percentage of new jobs being real estate related.
Year Total Jobs Total New Jobs New Real Estate Jobs Percent
1994 643,800 17,800 1,600 9.0%
1995 662,800 19,000 400 2.1%
1996 681,500 18,700 2,800 15.0%
1997 702,000 20,500 4,000 19.5%
1998 731,400 29,400 5,900 20.0%
1999 770,500 39,100 8,100 20.7%
2000 797,100 26,600 4,500 16.9%
2001 818,900 21,800 7,100 32.6%
2002 832,200 13,300 1,700 12.8%
2003 846,000 13,800 7,000 50.7%
2004 856,200 10,200 4,100 40.1%

Notes:

  • Job numbers were taken from a recent article in the Sacramento Bee, which was quoting numbers by the Employment Development Department in Sacramento.




Notes:
  • Inventory chart on the left depicts the inventory data in the tables above  (last updated 7/31/2006).
  • The National City chart on the right was pulled from a recent report by National City regarding overvalued and "extremely overvalued" (over 30% overvalued) cities in America.   At that point, they considered Sacramento roughly 54% overvalued, which fell into the "extremely overvalued" category.



Inventory Discrepancies
COUNTY IDX ZIP SACBEE.COM
El Dorado 1,883 1,503 2,077
Placer 3,574 3,410 3,874
Sacramento 1,1593 12,102 12,904
Yolo 1,068 619 1,233
Total 18,118 17,634 20,088

Notes:

  • IDX numbers searching  houses and condos (no land, commercial, mobile homes, etc).

  • Zip numbers searching Single Family, Condo, Multi family (no land, commercial, etc).

  • Sacbee numbers searching all "Single Family" (no lands, no multi-family, etc).

  • Sacbee's numbers include "Pending Sales".









Comments:
Great work! I'm starting to really love this page and I come here often (being in Sacramento after all!)

I noticed that inventory has now bottomed-out after that small holiday dip and is now on the way back up? This season is going to be truly scary. Fasten the seatbelts, its gonna' be a rough ride! ;-)
 
A hearty thank-you for all your work in assembling this data!

I check daily. Morbid, but true.
 
For those of you who follow the Sacramento real estate market, I've started a new blog Sacramento Land(ing): Is the Sacramento housing market headed for a soft or hard landing?
 
I also check daily and want to thanyou as well. I guess I took it for granted up until your updates stopped five days ago. The withdrawls are killing me.
 
Hey guys, I've been playing catchup on other stuff the last few days so that's why I've been slacking a bit.

Seems like after an increase (probably people relisting expired listings) the first couple weeks of the year, things have kind of stabilized.

drwende, if it's morbid, plenty of us are guilty. But hey, that's life sometimes...haha.

happyrenter, sorry about the withdrawals. As you can see, nothing big has happened the last couple days.
 
It came up on Ben jonses blog that the Holiday season isn't over until after the Superbowl. This is probably why the market has stalled:)
 
If my calculations are correct when this baby hits 15000 your going to see some serious shit!
 
Is there a way you can graph the inventory data? I'm a programmer. If you want to set something up where the data is graphed on your blog I would be glad to help you.
 
I'd also like to see some graphs.
I really liked golyon.com graphs of market pricing trends but sadly they stopped updating in October.
Bad for business I guess:)
 
Hey guys,

I have the one graph on the bottom of the page that I update once a month. I have checked out GoLyon's charts on a few times. I have not checked them out lately though, so I did not know they stopped doing so.

When I get a chance, I'll see about updating the population --> inventory data and I'll see about throwing those graphs up also.
 
I've been working on some graphs of the OFHEO Housing Price Index. Here are the Sacramento area plots:

Sacramento Area HPI
 
Looks like its taking off pretty good again. In November, it didn't take but a couple of weeks for inventory to go from the 56% range to the 69% high point. Therefore, if the pattern holds we should be entering another high inventory period within a week or two. I believe that inventory will continue to build and will surpass the November 15th levels, but I guess time will tell...
 
Darth,

Yeah, inventories built pretty quickly in the Oct-Nov period last year. They've slowed down quite a bit since then, but we'll see what happens. This is supposed to be the "slow season" after all....so who knows.
 
Very interesting numbers. I appreciate the work you've done.

Note, however, that the numbers shown below don't match on the two different spreadsheets:

Home Inventories (Supply)etc
DATE..........4 County Total
9/30/05.......9,284
10/21/05......10,125
10/31/05......10,926

Pop. vs Homes for Sale
DATE..........4 County Total
9/30/05.......11,424
10/21/05......12,463
10/31/05......13,451
 
Garth,

Thanks for the reminder. The numbers in the "Pop vs Homes for Sale" table were from an old set of numbers I had that included "pending sales". Thus, the higher inventory numbers.

I threw up a new table this morning to reflect the current numbers (exluding pending sales).
 
James,

Thanks for the clarification. I wonder if the mid-Nov 12K is an all-time historical high (unadjusted for population)?

If so, it's an interesting benchmark. And is February trying to climb that peak again?
 
I messed around with a few changes using anchors to make it easier to get right to certain numbers.

If you go directly to the Individual Post (archive date) it works faster than going to the entire Sacramento Housing Bubble Blog page (if that made any sense).

I'm just checking if this works...we'll see.
 
Don’t count your bubbles until they’re popped. Latest FHFB stats. Average Sales price by Metropolitan area.

http://www.fhfb.gov/GetFile.aspx?FileID=4437

Sacramento/Arden-Arcade/Truckee CA-NV
4th Qtr '04.....414.7
1st Qtr '05.....383.3
2d Qtr '05......449.5
3d Qtr '05......494.0
4th Qtr '05.....507.4
 
Garth,

You probably already know this, but housing prices are set at the margin as very few houses actually change hands year-to-year as a percentage of the total. To make the case by way of exaggerated example: If only 10 houses were sold in Sacramento for $1Mil each, the average and median would be $1Mil for the entire market. Obviously not representative of the market at large.

In order to make better sense of the small chart you have made, we'd also need to see sales volume as well. My guess is that sales volume continues to seriously decline as prices slowly edge upward. This is a predictable and repeating pattern in housing boom/bust cycles as the pool of first time buyers dries up and stubborn sellers hold out for last years' prices. The Sacramento late 80's early 90's boom ended with rapidly increasing inventory along with declining volume. Sound familiar? I would argue that the bust is well underway if you know what to look for.

James, great work again. I've been following the El Dorado Hills market specifically and I can tell you that we now have 423 active listings according to MetroList. This is more than the high point reached in November (418) and so we are in unchartered high-inventory territory here. It looks like the rest of El Dorado County still hasn't quite caught up as the County as a whole is about 100 listings below the high point reached in November.
 
Great job. Interesting charts.
 
Darth,

I must admit, though your explanation sounds reasonable, I don't understand it. I do know that average prices can be misleading. But they are surely relevant, and I presume the FHFB includes every sale in the entire metro region.

I can't seem to make this link work, but go to the address for the full FHFB report:
http://www.fhfb.gov/GetFile.aspx?FileID=4437

Increasing inventories and low volumes logically favor buyers. I only note that that the FHFB shows average prices still rising through the last quarter of '05.

The FHFB lumps together the full quarter and does not separate the specific increase or decrease in November versus October or December. Obviously, there are no numbers for 2006 yet.


"I'm not dead."

"Yes you are, be quiet!"

--Monty Python and the Holy Grail
 
Garth,

I like to think of this mostly as a psychology battle between fear and greed. When the housing cycle was in full boom (greed) mode, inventories were tight and sellers could sell in days (sometimes hours) for asking price or better. Even though most houses in any given neighborhood were not for sale, the owners of these houses still enjoyed the �paper gains� brought about by the sale of any houses in their neighborhood. This is the �prices set at the margin� concept. As the boom continued, the market psychology became ingrained to the point that any seller would automatically tack on 2-5% to the highest sales number they have heard of in their area and thus would lead the market up. Speculation was also rampant with the cash-out/refi/2nd home craze. During all of this, affordability continued to erode but the agents made the most of the situation with fear tactics (i.e. �Better buy now or you�ll be priced out forever!!!�)

All of this worked out great until the affordability level reached a certain point (historically around 12-14%) and then the ever-crucial first-time buyer was effectively priced out. The only buyers left are trade-up buyers, and most of these won�t be able to complete transactions because you always need at least one 1st-time buyer (or 2nd home buyer) to break the contingency �log-jam�. Sellers, sensing a top, rushed for the exits and a glut of homes hit the market simultaneously (this is the stage of the cycle currently, imho.) RE agents being what they are, still need to complete transactions, and so are always on the lookout for an elusive (and misinformed) 1st time buyer that they can still sell the �priced out forever� bill of goods to. I like to think of this as the �greater fool� theory. As the number of greater fools willing to mortgage their entire future to avoid being priced out forever (fear) dwindles, sales volume dries up, yet prices still drift higher as sellers believe they are entitled (greed) to full price plus a little more than last year and refuse to take anything less!!

Eventually, with enough inventory and enough properties sitting, agents will take on a new stance to complete transactions (as this is the #1 important issue for an agent). They will start using fear tactics on sellers and say stuff like, �The market has changed. You need to lower your price or risk getting less in a few months!� Then market comps change and the entire fear/greed dynamic changes in favor of buyers. Keep in mind that there are many more agents now than in the past and volume must continue or these people need to find new work, therefore they WILL drive the market down over time.

I�ve seen this whole thing play out before and we�re pretty much following the script exactly (although a little faster than usual due to rampant speculation and ultra-easy money starting to shake out.)

JMHO
 
I went to Zip Realty today after finding this blog and found the greater Sacramento region had approximately 10,000 listings. This covered an area boxed in from Davis to West Sac, up to Auburn, and over to Elderado Hills. It is actually higher since I didn't include the small areas which I didn't recognize. To me this seems like quite alot of for sale listings. What I don't understand is the new development. I drove out to Lincoln Crossing and 12 Bridges this past weekend (HOLY CRAP) there are alot of homes being built out there. I suspect the same thing is going on in Natomis, Elk Grove and El Dorado Hills. Do all these homes have buyers? Who is moving into these new homes?
 
Yeah Lincoln is nuts...the sea of red blimps above new developments is quite a view. I would also like to note something about ZipRealty...there are hundreds of properties not listed there. Not even FSBO properties -- just properties that aren't listed in the MLS. For instance, in my neighborhood there are 12-15 homes for sale...but on ZipRealty there are none. I suspect that the greater sac area is well above 12000 at this point. Nevertheless, the numbers on this site are an excellent guide.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
capitalme,

I tend to agree with you that there are more homes than this available for sale.

Between (non-MLS) ads placed for sale by owner on sites like "Help-U-Sell" or Craigslist, and then the old fashionied way of placing an ad in your local newspaper, or putting a sign on your front lawn...

There probably are a few hundred more overall.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
James,

Thanks for all the work you do!

After eight months of cranking out this data, I was curious if you have noticed any patterns, such as a particular day of the week where inventory spikes, etc.
 
Lander,

I really haven't been specifically paying attention to which particular day inventories increase the most....

But off the top of my head, it seems most increases come towards the end of the week (Thur-Sat), with slight dips early on in the week. That's not to say that happens everyweek, just a general observation I've made over the last few months.

If true, I'm not sure what exactly would explain that. One possibility might be sellers trying to list for the weekend so their listing shows up as "Just listed"...or something like that. That's just a guess though.
 
James

Thank you for your dedication to this site. The metro area inventory today must be the all time high in recent memory. At least a decade, right?
 
Any thoughts why foreclosures and pre-f are trending higher while Bk is trending down a bit?
 
Inventory skyrocketing again. Looks like we might hit 15,000 by June.
 
garth,

RE: BK vs. F or pre-f.

I would say that BK's artificially peaked due to recent changes in BK laws. F and pre-F are rising off of historic lows and are a good indicator that RE has peaked for this cycle. Obviously, it is very easy to avoid foreclosure if the underlying asset is appreciating at a high rate, but hard to avoid if asset is maxed-out and isn't getting any higher.

In California, BK will most likely not rise much even when the RE bust is in full effect due to CA laws regarding deed of trust vs. a traditional mortgage and title. What you will see a lot of is people simply leaving the keys on the counter and walking away from an oppressive mortgage rather than file for BK protection. You will also see many cancellations of new contracts (happening now in great numbers.)

F and pre-F were always the much more interesting stat IMHO, and there will be a lot of REO property (and bankrupt lenders) when this whole thing implodes.

James: Nice work. We still visit regularly although don't say much. It seems like we will have more to talk about though, now that inventory is moving beyond the highest point of last year (soon to be highest ever!!!)
 
Garth,

I think Darth hit it on the head with his insight on the Bankruptcy vs Foreclosures and Pre-foreclosures.

Last fall before the bankruptcy laws changed, people all over (not just Sac) had to get in while they still could under the old rules.

As far as the foreclosures go, you'll notice that in the time frame I've been tracking these, pre-foreclosures are up about 30% roughly (from 3,000 - 4,000), yet the foreclosures are up about 3x in that same time period.

Not sure if that's people who are just now getting hit with adjustables resetting? Or if it's just people with fixed who were still over-extended or a combination of factors. Either way, the trend is interesting. We'll see what happens going forward.

With inventories at roughly 12,000, yeah, it's about a 10 year high, that's pretty interesting I think.

Capitalme,

As far as inventories go, I have no clue how high they could actually go. I'm kind of surprised they've gone this far to be honest. I mean there hasn't been major job losses to contribute to people moving out of the area or anything like that. So all I can speculate (how's that for a "bubble" term) is:


1) It's people trying to get out at the top and planning to wait it out a bit.

2) People who know they're overextended and have to get out while they have a chance.

3) Investors who've realized the easy year over year gains are gone and that now the "rent" actually better cover the mortgage which we all know it won't in most cases.

I'm sure there are plenty of other ones, these are just the few I can think of.


Darth,

As far as the comments are concerned, no worries there. I know this blog is pretty much about just numbers, so there isn't too much to talk about on a daily basis...lol Thanks for the input on the whole bankruptcy, pre-foreclosure and foreclosure thing.


On another note..

I've been keeping monthly resale #'s and monthly median resale prices for almost a year now. I think with this next month, I'll try to post those along with a graph or two if I can get my butt in gear. It's interesting to see year over year comparisons on a monthly basis go down every month. (I'm referring to price appreciation % here).
 
Darth & James,

I myself wondered if the Bk numbers spiked just before the law became less forgiving.
Also, some may have tried to beat the deadline and then decided to file anyway. Finally, all the publicity last fall might have stimulated extra filings, too.

I agree that the California anti-deficiency and one form of action statutes encourage purchase money borrowers to walk away without personal recourse--they just lose their FICO score. I don't think the non-recourse statutes apply to HELOC borrowers, though.

I suppose that those who walk away from their homes can sometimes avoid bankruptcy that way.
 
Holy inventory! It's last november all over again.
 
Our Esteemed BlogMaster said,

Not sure if that's people who are just now getting hit with adjustables resetting? Or if it's just people with fixed who were still over-extended or a combination of factors.

I'm sure the pre-f and f will lag the re-sets by at least a month or two. No one is going to walk away from the loan the minute the payment jacks up. The most uninformed probably won't even understand what happened for a month or two. Many others will just keep scrimping and tightening the belt -- until they just can't anymore. It will be hard for them to admit defeat.

Bottom line, I'm guessing the re-set wave will lead pre-f by 2-5 months.
 
I assume that inventory is a key leading indicator for prices.

I also assume that foreclosure is a leading indicator for inventory. The way I figure, people who buy at trustee's sales are rarely occupiers. The process is rarified and intimidating compared to an arm's length sale. I'd guess this holds true not just for buyers but also for the most agents/brokers. (Though the process will become common if we keep heading this direction. Barring an immediate return to 2 digit price increases, what else is there to stem the rising tide of re-set/pre-f?)

Also, distress properties will probably need a lot of work, deferred maintenance before they're marketable again. Bottom line, f-sales feed back into the inventory for a while.
 
Esteemed BlogMaster:

Here's a quote from Realty Times:

March 2006 inventory of 9,694 homes for sale is 169 percent higher than March 2005 inventory. This is still lower than the region's inventory high of 13,507 homes for sale in April 1992. There has been a 28 percent drop in total inventory since April of 1992.

http://realtytimes.com/rtmcrcond/California~Sacramento~thomasgroves

I think they're counting slightly different numbers, but even so it seems the inventory is approaching all-time historical highs. Note also that RT stories change frequently so if you want to catch it you have go soon.

Granted, the absolute number of listings is less meaningful than the per capita data -- which you've also graciously correlated. Nevertheless, the absolute numbers will get the headlines. Always sizzle before steak. Will you be ready to call it? Will you break the story? Can you track your own data back to April '92 so you are comparing the same data set?

Not that you have nothing better to do. But you can make a splash if you're so inclined. You've obviously put a lot into this already. Maybe you want to put a bow on it.

P.S. What's the HTML to create a link?
 
I can't seem to post the link to the RT article.

The main page is http://realtytimes.com

Click on the tab for local market conditions, and then click California followed by Sacramento. Finally, click on the "More" link on the article by Thomas Groves on 4/19/06.
 
"March 2006 inventory of 9,694 homes for sale is 169 percent higher than March 2005 inventory. This is still lower than the region's inventory high of 13,507 homes for sale in April 1992. There has been a 28 percent drop in total inventory since April of 1992."

Great posts Garth. One thing that comes to mind is the proliferation of FSBO properties for sale now vs. 1992. In 1992, discount and no service brokers were uncommon at best, and FSBO meant sticking a sign out in the yard and maybe advertising in the local newspaper.

Now there are many flavors of assist and FSBO services, some of which may not show in the traditional Realtor (MLS) statistics. My guess (purely anectdotal) is that there may be as many as one or two thousand of these properties in the greater Sacramento area.

Nevertheless, we still may break the all-time MLS inventory record within the next 6 or 8 months, regardless of the FSBO numbers.
 
Hey Guys,

I looked at that article, and yes the numbers are different. To be honest, I cannot explain why their current numbers are so low...or mine, etc are so high.

I'm using IDX, and as of yesterday, the 4 county total was 12,386. Zip realty is running about 12,500 right now for the 4 counties. The Sacramento Bee is running about 15,445 as of today. (Granted, they also include pending sales, lots, etc).

All 3 (IDX, Zip Realty and the Sacramento Bee are all pulling current numbers off of the MLS...Multiple Listing Service.

As to why the descrepancy between

Realty Times: 9,694
My Blog pulling from IDX and MLS: 12,400 +/-
Zip Realty using MLS: 12,500 +/-
Sac Bee using MLS (including pendings, etc) 15,500 +/-

I really don't have a good answer. Sacbee's numbers including pendings will definitely have a different number, but as to why Realty Times is still 2,500-3,000 lower, I can't say.

If anyone has an idea, suggestion, etc, I'd definitely be interested.
 
Per Capita listings at '94 - '94 levels? Amazing.

You should be getting paid for this.
 
12,999, OMG!
 
greetings from Bubble Markets Inventory Tracking. As per ziprealty, we have crossed the historic high for inventory of 13,507.

The count currently sits at 13,521.
 
ocrenter,

I've been watching your blog (all the different areas you cover). You're doing an awesome job covering so many things!
 
excellent work here as well James.

A reader posted a question on my site that only a Sac local can answer. The reader asked if the current inventory of new homes are at par with the volume that we saw back in 1992. Intuitively I would say there's a lot more new homes now. Is that true?
 
James & OC Renter working together?

It's like the first Superman and Spider-Man crossover issue.
 
I'm not sure how the numbers for "new" homes compare to back in the early 90s. I'm not sure that's easily tracked or if the home builders give out the information readily.

However, given the pace that builders have been building this past year, and the only real slow down in new starts was March I think (based on weather conditions according to most reports...but who knows), I'd venture to guess that there are plenty of new homes available as of now. It seems like every weekend you're seeing "sales", "discounts", "12 hour sales" all over the place.

Again, I have no numbers to go by, this is just a guess. Anyone else have an idea??
 
Builders have the same interest in keeping inventory levels low as OPEC has in reducing pumping. I don't know how it works, but big homebuilders certainly control when a given house is "finished" and then officially placed in MLS. If a builder already has a backlog that he's not selling it's hard to imagine how or why they would add even more additional unsold units to the inventory to compete with their existing unsold inventory. Why would they want to compete with themselves?

If anyone knows how it works in the real world I'm all ears. I just assume that builders will turn down the spigot as fast as they can right now. That is, they will understate their own inventory of unsold homes as much as possible. I don't know and certainly can't prove it. Just wondering.
 
I like to look at the graphs and the posts on this site, which have confirmed what I know to be a good decision I made when I transfered up north in my state employement in NOv 2004. I decided to rent a small place.

I live in Marysville close to a railroad line and even though I knew the housing market was bound to slow, am still amazed that every day, train load after trainload of lumber and wood products continue to pass through Marysville heading south.

Last weekend (May 8, 2006) a lady friend I went to spend the day with in Sacramento had driven out from Walnut Creek to Elk Grove to meet me at a house she, her sister and brother in law bought last year, as an "investment." I didn't think much of the fact that she is trying to rent it, but then I went in the house (huge, with so many windows -- and high ones -- one would need a full time maid to keep up). Then I went up stairs and looked out into the back yards of the surrounding new homes filled with weeds. No one was living in those houses either!! She said her house will rent for about $600 mo less than their payment (I have no idea what kind of loan it is). Even the front yards of these houses, haven't even had the lawns mowed. The sod is 8 inches high.

I pondered this, as well as what she told me the three of them are doing with their present house they are
living in together in Walnut Creek. She told me that they just "bought" another, more expensive house ($780,000) in Walnut Creek that they will be moving into next week and
selling the other.

And still, all the huge development companies continue to build, breakneck. And with default rising daily. I have never seen anything like this before. What is keeping it
going? It doesnt make any sense.
 
I like to look at the graphs and the posts on this site, which have confirmed what I know to be a good decision I made when I transferred up north in my state employment in Nov 2004. I decided to use some money I had saved to buy a $56,000 home in a small retirement community 80 miles west of Tucson. I rent ($400 mo, incl utilities) a small place near work.

I live in Marysville close to a railroad line and even though I knew the housing market was bound to slow, am still amazed that every day, train load after trainload of lumber and wood products continue to pass through Marysville heading south.

Last weekend (May 8, 2006) a lady friend I went to spend the day with in Sacramento had driven out from Walnut Creek to Elk Grove to meet me at a house she, her sister and brother in law bought last year, as an "investment." I didn't think much of the fact that she is trying to rent it, but then I went in the house (huge, with so many windows -- and high ones -- one would need a full time maid to keep up). Then I went up stairs and looked out into the back yards of the surrounding new homes filled with weeds. No one was living in those houses either!! She said her house will rent for about $600 mo less than their payment (I have no idea what kind of loan it is). Even the front yards of these houses, haven't even had the lawns mowed. The sod is 8 inches high.

I pondered this, as well as what she told me the three of them are doing with their present house they are living in together in Walnut Creek. She told me that they just "bought" another, more expensive house ($780,000) in Walnut Creek that they will be moving into next week and selling the other.

And still, all the huge development companies continue to build, breakneck. And with default rising daily. I have never seen anything like this before. What is keeping it
going? It doesn’t make any sense.
 
Walt,

I think there are quite a few vacant "investments" out there these days. I hope your friend comes out of it all right in the end. If they bought mid to late last year, I'd think they bought pretty near the top. The only way I see them renting out the house for only $600 less than the montly payment is if they took out one of those Interest Only or Option ARM type loans. Or...a third possibility would be that they put down a good down payment and the loan amount is not that large. Not sure if she mentioned it or not, but did that figure include taxes, insurance, etc or just the bare mortage itself? Those are difficult questions to ask friends, and sometimes I think it's better to just let it go and not pry much. That is of course unless they're just blurting out numbers w/o even asking them...haha.

On a more serious note...that $400 a month you're paying is quite a bargain these days...that's great. No utitilies (in your case), no taxes, insurance, etc.
 
Was curious were you rec'd the info for housing population versus inventory.....???? Thanks
 
Historical inventory numbers came from a Sacbee article about a year ago.
 
inventory seems to have declined in the last week in El Dorado Hills. Went from 455 homes to 425 homes on Yahoo.
 
Great site.

Do the inventory numbers include new subdivision homes that would not show up in the MLS?

Somewhere I read the all time high - adjusted for population - for the Sac area is 18,000 in April 1992, but those numbers exclude pending sales from inventory. Are pending sales part of these inventory numbers?
 
Doug,

These numbers do not include New Subdivision homes...unless individual builders are placing individual homes on the MLS. Otherwise, these are just resale homes and condos.

As far as pending sales, as far as I know, these numbers do not include pending sales. At one point they did, but that changed back in Nov of 2005. The only searchable website that I know of that includes pending sales is the Sacbee website. They will actually tell you which ones are pending (with a PS notation). If you use their search, you will probably come up with 17,000 maybe 18,000 properties for sale.
 
James,

Thanks again for a great blog. I'm sure that there are many people that visit regularly that don't comment so keep up the good work and we're watching closely!!!
 
I read today that Sacramento has the most new home construction in CA. Indeed, this region has 10% of all the recently built homes in the entire state. And CA in turn has 10% of all new homes in the US.

As James noted today, per capita inventory of MLS resale listings here already equals '93 levels. So, what happens then when you add on top of the resale listings the phenomenal numbers of new homes in the region? The combined inventory of new and resale homes surely exceeds all-time record per capita levels of '92.

James is THE MAN.
 
Look at the OFHEO numbers today. Prices fell in fifty-two MSA's last quarter. That's big news in itself.

But then restrict your inquiry to the fify largest MSA's (as defined in the last PMI ERET report.) Prices fell in four of the fifty largest MSA's last quarter. I show the 4 areas, the decreases last quarter and the five year increase. You may have to adjust the text size in Explorer to view this table correctly, or just copy and paste this comment to Excel.

If Sacramento continues steady at this rate, nominal prices would drop about 1% in 2006 (before inflation). But notice which area has the farthest to fall. Sacramento has by far the steepest runup in the last five years. Sac is more than double the increase in Boston, which is often mentioned as the hottest bubble.

MSA.................1-Qtr...5-Yr
Warren-Troy MI...-0.45...18.77
Denver-Aurora CO..-0.35...21.15
Cambridge MA......-0.24...50.3
Sacramento CA.....-0.24...112.23
San Jose CA.......-0.20...45.75
 
Correction: Boston is a separate MSA from Cambridge. Each of them is individually included among the 50 largest MSA's as listed by PMI. Prices rose in the Boston MSA rose by .24% in the last quarter and by 50.3% in the last five years.
 
110% and growing. I can't even imagine when inventory will peak, but I know we are not even close.
 
Garth,

Yeah, I read that article last week about the 10% thing. That really surprised me. I kind of figured places like Bakersfield or Fresno would have had the most construction last year.

There's been a few reports regarding builders/developers walking away from options they have to buy more property. That surprised me also. I'm wondering if some of those options were opened in the last couple years at prices that are higher than they want. Maybe they figure they can walk away from them and pick them up again cheaper a couple years down the road...who knows?
 
Out at the peak,

I'm surprised things have gone this high myself. I think many people were thinking a "good" spring and/or summer would help things take off again, but it doesn't look like it's happening...at least not yet.
 
As always, thank you for your dedication to this remarkable site.
 
JAMES. IS. THE. MAN.
 
Garth,

It's no big deal.....I like watching whole housing market change. By the way...it looks like Foreclosure numbers just keep going up by the week. I don't have any historical numbers (I've heard on the news a couple times that we're still low on that), but I think the trend is definitely a bad thing so early in this "topping off" of the market. I think it just really speaks to the low affordability of housing in general and second, how many people who bought the last few years who couldn't afford the home they were put into in the first place (probably by some non-traditional loan, overly pushy real estate agent and mortgage broker, media hype, etc).
 
James,

The foreclosure numbers are fascinating. I notice that pre-foreclosures have increased roughly 50% in the last nine months while actual foreclosures quintupled.

The increase in ARM rates has been a fairly steady climb. So I'm guessing that's why the rising pre-foreclosures are dramatic but steady and linear, not meteoric.

On the other hand, I suspect that the ratio of troubled borrowers who just turn in the keys (stop making payments) is accellerating. Many speculators saw their dreams of quick flips and easy riches disappear when skyrocketing appreciation stopped in the fall of '05. They're just giving up.

The traditional forecasters like UCLA Anderson say it takes a recession with big job losses to get housing deflation. They say that homeowners will default on everything else before giving up on the house. The increasing ratio of foreclosures to pre-foreclosures suggests a different dynamic at work. Even NAR/CAR concedes that speculative investment has driven the recent runup more than normal. So I suspect we'll see unprecedented foreclosures rates even without job losses (the harm to the economy will follow soon after housing deflation.)

What can stop it at this point? Even if the Fed pauses its rate hikes in July that won't slow down the 10 year note or mortgage rates. So a return to ultra cheap mortgage money won't happen. And the troubles at Fannie and Freddie will preclude further loosening of credit standards. Where will the money come from to re-fuel the housing rocket? It just won't happen. The ballistic phase and re-entry come next.
 
Correction: Actual foreclosures are up roughly 500% while pre-foreclosures are up only about 50%. How does that grab you?
 
"So I suspect we'll see unprecedented foreclosures rates even without job losses (the harm to the economy will follow soon after housing deflation) What can stop it at this point?"

Excellent post. The myth that there must be some sort of a job-loss shock to the economy in order for a housing bust to happen is just that - a myth.

Economists (or should I say historical revisionists?) maintain that the Southern California RE bust of the 1990's was a direct result of a slowdown in defense contracting in the area (due to the peace dividend) and thus the RE bust soon followed. I'm not so sure I agree with this. IMHO, it looked as if RE was at a natural cycle top at the time and was due for a serious correction. Once the correction was well underway, some of the wealth effect was removed from the local economy and job losses mounted. Its sort of a chicken and egg argument.

With the current collapsing RE market, it will be incumbent upon those people who have watched closely for a number of years (we bloggers among others) to maintain the reality in the argument and not let Realtors and other so called "experts" try to say that the RE bust was due to anything other than a financial mania gone bad.

Rising interest rates won't be the cause of this bust, nor will job losses, although these may be an EFFECT of the housing bust as all this debt goes bad and numerous non-essential real estate jobs get eliminated.

That's the ironic part of all of this: once all of those ABS and derivatives start crashing on the rocks due to default, interest rates will rise to protect investors at the exact time when higher rates will do the most damage.
 
At the EDD labormarketinfo website, they have data from 1990.
For the 4 county region, in the period 1990-95, the number of construction jobs fell by 26% and the number of real estate related jobs by 10%. The remainder of real estate related fields (architecture, etc) had only minimal changes. Overall, I was surprised it was this little. A similar retrenchment would be a bit more than 20,000 jobs with today's employment numbers (or about 2% of the employment base).

Something else that was intriguing was that the 4 county region, the number of new jobs from 1998 to 2005 was 171,000. Number of new sf homes per Sac Bee article, about 121,000 and another 32,000 residential units, for a total of 153,000. Anyone know the rule of thumb of jobs per homes?
 
Garth,

I don't agree with the idea that it would take big job losses to cause price corrections either. I think in this case, the price corrections will result in job losses. So much of the runup has been caused by the easy credit available the last few years. That worked while prices appreciated. Will it work going forward? I don't think so. As soon as the purchases of these loans start coming to their senses that things are out of whack, that in itself will push rates up, regardlesss of what the fed does IMO.
 
Darth,

I think you're right...all the variables coming into play in will make the difference: first and foremost, the typical real estate cyle. Couple that with tighter credit...tighter lending standards... more foreclosures....the mass reduction in re-fi's to pay for the new boat, car, vacation, etc, will all lead to job losses going forward. And regarding the "non-essential" real estate jobs that will be lost... I couldn't agree more. The sad part is, it will hurt a lot of people. However in the long run, a decline will good for the majority I think.

I do wonder however, going forward a couple years, (if things do come down), what the explanation will be from all the "experts" out there. I mean so far, inventories have exploded, but prices are still high, so the decline hasn't happened. We'll see I guess.
 
Doug,

As far as the EDD web site is concerned, they have an abundance of data in their Data Library. It looks like you've been looking into the construction info there. I haven't really checked into it to be honest. I should....but I haven't.

As far as the region losing that many jobs....that would hurt a LOT. It's funny how you hear so many news reports about how "well balanced" our economy is and how all jobs are growing. The gripe I have with that is that most of those jobs and the job growth is being fed by spending from housing. First there's the construction workers, architects, real estate industry, mortage industry, title industry, etc. Next, all the money that is being spent by people re-financing every couple years. That in turns provides more jobs in restaurants, auto dealerships, starbucks...lol, boat and motorcycle industries, etc.

I think this housing boom over the last few years has really hidden problems within our economy:

1) The trade deficit, job losses related to manufacturing, exportable goods and services, etc.

2)Our weakening financial position, both on a personal level and on a govt level. At one point roughly 30 years ago, we were the largest creditor nation. At this point, I think we're the largest debtor nation. People think they're rich...but in fact....most things we have we owe money on....and to foreigners.

Damn, I think I went off topic there...I do ramble sometimes!

Anyways, thanks for the post and good info on the job stats, I'll look into that some more when I get a chance.
 
SacHousingBubble has always been the premier site for local housing data. (In fact I haven't seen any bubble site anywhere that compares to what James has done with the data.)

Now he is developing some of the most in-depth, balanced analysis anywhere. I'm not talking about the hyperventilating loudmouths on the big boy bubble pages. They're fun and intersting. But what James does is more compelling. SacHousingBubble is a dead-sober indictment of the current state of the union in housing.
 
Last year inventory peaked on November 15th. How did the conditions last year compare to this one? Last year's run-up in inventory between June 31 and Nov 15 was about 92%. That would put us at 31,289 homes by November 15th 2006 based on our current position. Sounds obsurd; but at the rate it's going I wouldn't be surprised. As the number of fools begins to shrink inventory seems to expand exponentially. Some friends of my folks are moving from the Bay area to Sac. Last week we spoke and I urged them to rent because home prices were going down. They said "no no, we need a home" yada yada. I sent them some listings to check out from Zip; a few of which had been reduced over 20% in a month! He called me yesterday asking me where a good place to look for rentals is...
 
Capitalme,

Yes, last year, numbers increased at a faster rate (% wise). As the overall numbers get larger, it's more difficult to increase at the same % rate. I don't think we'd get even close to that high number wise. You're right about the # of fools beginning to shrink....lol But hey, some will argue now is still a good time to buy, so who knows. Everyone has their own unique situation.

As far as your friends from the bay area...are they moving to Sac because of work and live? To work and commute back to the bay? To retire? If they're not familiar with the different areas, I would definitely rent for a bit. That would give them sometime to get their feet wet, see if they like the particular neighborhood, possibly check out other ones, etc. However, sometimes people don't want to move twice, so they want to find one place, buy it, and call it quits. That works for some people, so it's all good.
 
Assuming the population remains the same and net inventory climbs over 50 units a day, we will have a ratio of 99 people per RE listing on September 29th.

Population and inventory trend will change, so this has a margin of error of +/- 14 days.

I already believe the ratio is at a dangerous level. Breaking to double digits is a critical level.
 
Hey, ya'll. I've read the posts often and a special thanks to James, a champion of truth.

Just wanted to give everyone an update as to my status after having come up to the Sacramento area with my state job. (Hey, now. Isn't a civil service wage the true thermometer of the economy? Our pay is about the same as it was before the housing bubble started)!

But anyway, the Ajo, Az home I bought last summer (for just $56,000) is leased to a border patrol couple (rent exceeds my 15 yr note, incl taxes & insurance, by $300 mo)! :-) and I am transfering to Yreka! Hurray! I'm saved! Life is more normal up there. I mentioned the housing bubble to someone up there many weeks ago, and they looked at me funny. They didnt know what I meant. :-)
 
OMG the foreclosures! Like watching a slow motion train wreck. You wan't to look away. You just can't.
 
Garth,

Another interesting thing about that chart is the BK's, which I thought were more or less irrelevant. The numbers for last year were artificially high due to the new BK laws, but there has been a very slow and steady climb beginning in May. I don't believe there is any seasonal BK effect? If not, it could be directly related to the end of the bubble.
 
I think that the graph would be more comprehensive if you reversed it to show the latest data on top (july 06) and the older at the bottom (93).
Looking at the bottom, I don't know which county is which and so on.

PS - Check out my sacramento real estate blog here:
http://www.RealEstateTomato.com
If you like, we can exchange links.
 
Hey guys,

I've been slacking off lately. I'll see if I can get my butt in gear a bit more.

Kevin, I inserted county headings preceding every month which should make it easier to follow. I should have done that a long time ago actually. Thanks for the input.
 
Where does the inventory data come from?

I see different numbers for the 4 county area on different sites.
 
Schauer,

I use IDXCentral for daily numbers. As far as your seeing different numbers on different sites, that's understandable...that's the web for you. The lowest inventory numbers I've seen come out of Lyon Real Estate. In the middle of the pack seem to be IDX (which I'm using) and Zip Realty (used by many other sites and blogs), and on top of the heap comes Sacbee.com which is usually 2-3,000 higher than the rest. They, however, also display pending sales with a PS next to each one.
 
zillow fans - a caution. Zillow is estimating a parcel of land (5051 bella vista circle zip=95631) at $315K, but that same parcel sold in May 2006 for $227K. My guess is that zillow needs a number of sales in an area before its formula catches up.

There is a lot of speculation that the Sac area has become overbuilt, but no stats. Are there any sites that show the total number of dwelling units (apartments, condos plus sfh) for the four county region? Compared to actual population? I'd like to be able to compare that to the early 1990s.
 
alright, somebody has to go check on James to make sure he's still alive. :-)
 
What happen to the daily updates?

Taking a vacation?
 
Darth Toll, Schauer, I've been thinking the same thing.
 
I was shocked to hear of James passing. He was a true original.
 
rllowery,

Okay, stop it. You're starting to freak me out.
 
Is this blog still active? I'm going to cry...
 
Now is not the time to cry about the posts we missed, but to celebrate the posts we received.

What did you like best about James and his blog?
 
Does anyone here know James? Is he alive?
 
No, he's not dead, but thanks for the flowers.

I've been swamped lately (and a bit lazy....I have to admit). About the only blogs I've been following lately is Ben's.

Ok, I'll see if I can get my butt in gear again.....I know I said that about a month ago. Maybe it's the summer heat...who knows.
 
Welcome back, James. You deserve any break you take. Either that or a big raise.
 
James,

Can you tell me what criteria you are using for obtaining your 17,957 number? I'm not questioning your data, just trying to see what you are using. I'm getting 17,621 using all residential and mobile home listings through MLS. Thanks.
 
James, you mention Ben's site as the site you've been following. What is the address of his site?
 
I think this is the one you're after:

http://thehousingbubbleblog.com/

VERY informative.
 
James,

Great site - is there a way to archive old comments - or to order them so that the most recent come up first.

Tx - Doug
 
The latest batch of OFHEO numbers are due 9/1/06 with the numbers for 2QTR '06. I'll report the Sac numbers here first when they arrive.

The major home value indices like PMI, Consumer Reports, MarketWatch and others use these numbers because they're considered the most reliable and authoritative. IIRC Case and Shiller helped develop the OFHEO methodology. It tracks the average change of a specific parcel so it avoids some of the anomolies of the infamous "median" price change.

The OFHEO index has it's own issues, I think. But, best I can tell, it's the final "gold standard" on the history of residential RE prices.
 
Hey guys,

I put up a small table at the bottom of the blog today listing inventories from IDX (which is what I'm using), Zip Realty, and Sacbee.com.

Discrepancies may be the result of:

- Each site has it's own search criteria, and it may or may not be possible to search using every possible scenario (sfr, condo, mobile home, half-plex, du-plex, multi-family, land, commerical, etc).

-How often numbers are updated, however that number should be small and should almost "self correct" on a daily basis.

-Pending sales or not (which I think Sacbee is the only one showing those).

- What data each site actually has access to. This may sound strange, but what I mean is, when a realtor/broker/etc accesses the MLS...are they each given access to the same "exact" data? Are they given access to the "raw tables" (very unlikely) to which they can then extract every bit of information? Or are they given data in some customized "view" (more than likely) that may be different depending on what type of package they purchase, etc? Once they do get access to that data, how are they querying the data? Is it possible each site queries the data a little differently and as such would result in different numbers?

- Operator error (yes, I make plenty).

- These are just some thoughts as to why numbers vary from site to site, blog to blog, etc. If anyone has any "first hand" knowledge as to exactly "how" their system accesses the MLS (pre-packaged application, customized application, direct access to tables or to customized views, etc), I'd be interested in hearing more about it.

Pesonally, I would not take the word (or number in this case) of any particular site or blog. As a whole, the numbers are moving in step, and a few hundred here or there, when you're talking about anywhere from 17,000-20,000 is not that much of a difference (in my opinion). As with anything, I think it's good to get info from different sites and then try to make your best judgement accordingly.

- And for the record....I'm not claiming my #'s are 100% correct....these are just one set of numbers to look at.
 
As far as the the comments are concerned, I'm not sure you can change the order of the comments (most recent first, etc). I looked through the settings, but didn't find anything for that. I'll look into that a bit more later on.
 
As far as when I referred to "Ben's" site, Agent Bubble was correct regarding TheHousingBubbleBlog.
 
James,

Thanks for the new table and detailed explanation. There's been a lot of hand wringing among Sac inventory afficionados at the various web sites. But everyone seem to agree that the numbers are all fairly close, and it's the general trend that counts.

Inventory is relevant because we believe it tells us where prices are heading, which is what we all want to know. We look at the history--at the last big drop in '92. That year also had the "old record" high inventory at 13,507. The oft-cited 13,507 number apparently comes from a SacBee article as quoted by a later Realty Times article.

I've never seen the old Bee article. Nor have I ever seen anyone discuss what components were include in the 13,507. So really we don't know what the reference point includes. We can infer that is was similar to your IDX number because your numbers in '93 are fairly close. That's about it.

Bottom line, the only thing we know for sure today is (1) inventory is near or above all-time historical high numbers, and (2) prices have started falling just like they did the last time we saw this kind of glut.

In addition to these core "facts," I add a few more bad omens for prices in Sac. (1) The meteoric run-up of about 120% from '01 to '06 is unparalleled as far as I can recall. (2) Nor can I recall the extreme "unaffordability" quotient as compared to local wages. (3) The crazy run-up is based in part on increased speculation/flipping as opposed to owner-occupiers coupled with insane loan programs. These two components of the price increase rocket ride create an unstable, unsustainable foundation for current prices. (4) The housing run up has fed on itself by creating jobs and wages in construction, lending, brokerage, home improvement, and the ripple effect through the rest of the service industry here. This RE job snowball is now melting with layoffs in all these industries, which is a huge drag on median income nationwide, and especially in Sac.

Not a pretty picture for prices.
 
Here's a post I recently added to another blog that may offer a little bit of explanation. I think we all agree the inventory is going up. I reported 17,621 just 2-3 days ago. I'm now showing 17,775!
----------------------------------
There's always been some question on the accuracy of inventory numbers since they differ so dramatically from one site to the next. Let me go over a quick primer for how our MLS works.

In MLS, there are 6 "Property Types" that agents can use when entering a new listing. Only one can be used. They are:

Residential
Mobile Home
Residential Income
Land
Commercial
Business Opportunity


Each "Property Type" has multiple subtypes that can be used as well. They are:

Residential
1 House on Lot
2 Houses on Lot
Condo
Co-op
Modular/Manufactured
Half Plex
Mobile Home
Other

Mobile Home
Single Wide
Double Wide
Triple Wide
Quad Wide
Expando
Two Story
Other

Residential Income
Single Family
Duplex
Trplex
Fourplex
Other

Land
Residential Lot
Residential Acreage
Commercial Lot
Commercial Acreage
Agricultural
Recreation
Industrial

Commercial
Commercial/Retail
Car Wash
Church
Fixer
Hotel/Motel
Industrial
Mini Market
Mobile Home Park
Professional
Restaurant
Self Storage
Service Station
Other

Business Opportunity
Automotive
Bar
Beauty / Barber
Commission Sale
Food Service
Garage
Hotel / Motel
Liquor Store
Manufacturer
Professional
Recreational
Restaurant
Retail
School
Service Station
Specialized Services
Wholesale
Other

Notes:

You can only specify one "Property Type", but can use multiple "Subtypes" when entering a listing.

When searching, if you select multiple "Property Types", you cannot select any "Subtypes". The system assumes you mean every "Subtype" within a "Property Type."
 
Agent Bubble,

Thanks for the info on how properties are listed in the MLS. You used the term "our mls". Do you work for the MLS service or do you work for a broker, agent, etc who uses MLS?

The reason I ask is because if you work for MLS, then I will assume (yes, not good to do), that you are using their proprietary software that they designed or had someone design for them to perfom property searches.

If you are a broker or work for a broker (not an MLS employee yourself), do you use software that MLS provided you? Software that they created and sell, lease, etc? Or do you use software that either some 3rd party software vendor created, or possibly your own company's IT department created, modified, etc?

After reading your post, and how both entries and searches are performed, I think the issues in inventory numbers have more to do with how different brokers access the MLS. What software they use, how detailed it is, how accurate their reporting is, etc. If every broker, agent, etc used the exact same software provided them by the MLS, I'd be confident that numbers would be pretty consistent across the board. If that is not the case and there are many different applications being used by many different brokers out there, I could see where discrepancies would occur.

Can you give us some more insight on any of this? Thanks.
 
Hey James,

I'm actually a broker with my own company. MetroList (the company that houses the data) is the primary MLS for El Dorado, Merced (North Western), Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus and Yolo counties. We use Prospector to access the data, which is an internet-based tool tied directly to Metrolist data. It's a very powerful tool that is used for everything an agent does to a listing. We also have access to county tax records online. You must be a member of one of the above county's Realtor Association to have access. Some agents (like myself) also have search engines on our website. Those search engines use IDX and also hit against data stored in Metrolist and should be as accurate as the data I pull through Prospector. I have heard that places like the Sac Bee get snapshots of the data in Metrolist, and it's not necessarily real time data as found in Prospector. What I mean by that is if I entered a new listing at 3:00pm on August 1st, 2006, any agent would be able to view it at 3:01pm on the same day. However, that data might not be available to folks searching through a 3rd party search site like Sacbee or Realtor.com.

I would suspect that some reporting agencies may not be accurate because their data is not current. I'd also suspect that some are not taking all listings into account to somehow massage the numbers for their own self interest. My view is that statistics don't lie, people do.

Finally, I can assure you that if someone at Lyon or Coldwell Banker ran a search right now of all Redidential and Mobile Home listings, they would come up with 17,728.

If you'd like to talk further, please don't hesitate to send me an e-mail. I'm at: agentbubble [at] gmail [dot] com
 
Agent Bubble,

Thanks for the info on the system your company is using. I've kind of suspected that most innacuracies in numbers come from the retrieval side of things. Since most sites say they pull data from the MLS, I would hope that the numbers would be the same. Since they're not, it makes me think the differences come in the retrieval of the data, versus the data in the MLS itself.

Your company is using Prospector. I wonder how many other software applications others are using. Do they perform the same searches and then post those numbers on their sites? I doubt it to be honest. The breakdown you gave on how properties are listed and then searched is quite extensive (possibly too extensive). I could see how some software could run their queries a bit different than another and come up with different results.....quite easily actually.

I myself wonder why Lyon is always soooo low with their numbers, but that's another story. Also, when Sacbee reports numbers in their stories (not their home search), they always quite a pretty low number also, and they usually site Dataquick and Trendgraphix. I've noticed Trendgraphix info on GoLyon's site, so I'm not sure if they're one and the same, work together, etc. But I found it interesting.

And for the record...I'm not claiming my #'s are 100% accurate...they're just one set of numbers to look at.
 
James,

I did a doubletake when I read the 7/15 and 7/22 pre-foreclsosure numbers. Any ideas what caused the big drop from 4,747 to 2,910? That's very surprising.
 
I did the same when I saw that. I've been following Foreclosure.com for about a year now and when that happened, I was surprised. I'm not sure if they dump listings out of their system in "bulk" fashion or what. Nonetheless..it's stuff like this that makes me wish I had direct access to the systems that store the data versus relying on someone else's results. It's too difficult to know exactly what is going on.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Archives

09/10/05   01/03/06   08/29/06  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?