I recently investigated the feasibility of purchasing a home again, and the data confirmed why I am staying put. My current rent for a 2BR house in Los Angeles is ~$5,500/mo. I analyzed 2+BR/1.5BA properties in my neighborhood on [Site Name] and used Gemini OCR to extract the following statistics for active listings:
- Range $8.85 Million ($0.65M to $9.50M)
- Mean (Average) $2.425 Million (Sum of $92.16M / 38 properties)
- Median (Middle) $2.04 Million
- Mode (Most Common) $2.50 Million (appears 3 times)
I performed the same analysis for houses sold in the last three months within the same map area, with the following results:
- Range $1.155 Million ($0.725M to $1.88M)
- Mean (Average) $1.236 Million (Sum of $28.433M / 23 properties)
- Median (Middle). $1.25 Million
- Mode (Most Common) $1.10 Million (Appears 3 times)
The data confirms the disconnect: the only properties actually moving are those priced near the "least unaffordable" floor. Meanwhile, the bulk of the market is sitting stagnant because sellers are holding out for prices that, at current interest rates, make zero financial sense for a buyer compared to renting.
Not asking you to dox yourself, and I’m not questioning your take that renting is better than buying, but are you sure the data you pulled didn’t have a filter where you ended up with apples to oranges on the listing vs sale prices?
Just trying to find a hood in LA, at least the city itself, where there’s a $9M+ home for sale and where during the past 3 months the max sale price has been less than $2M. Unless the $9M place for sale is a total outlier.
Maybe it’s a small part of a single hood but I’m not sure you can conclude much about the broader city if that’s the case. Or maybe the asking prices didn’t have a bed/bath filter but the sale prices did?
