Posts Tagged ‘Sacramento Real Estate Market’

Sacramento County Real Estate Market Update, January, 2011

Opportunity for Home Buyers

Sacramento County real estate market in January 2011 registered growth in sales primarily caused by foreclosures. This growth in sales indicates investor buyers and home owners continue to prefer the Sacramento County real estate. The drop in price also offered a good opportunity to home buyers to go for shopping. Low price of units helped many to found bigger houses within their budget, and this led to an increase in average size of units sold.

Foreclosure Sales Push Up Volume

Sacramento real estate market statistics show 1,343 units were sold in January 2011. This is a big increase compared to conditions a year ago. There were 1,176 units changed hands in January 2010. This 14.2 percent rise is attributed to huge increase in foreclosure sales this January. There were 643 foreclosure sales last month, 130 units more than the last January figures. This 25.3 percent hike in foreclosure sales gives this segment 47.9 percent of total sales volume this January. A year before, foreclosure sales were 43.6 percent of total sales.

Short sales also witnessed growth this January and around a quarter of total sales are from this segment. They went up by 17.8 percent compared to the figures of January last year. There were 337 short sales this January compared to 286 units in January 2010.

Nondistressed sales this January stands at 363 units. This was 14 units less than January 2010 figures. As the price of real estate in Sacramento County continue to remain less than the last year, the decrease in nondistressed sales is understandable. Despite registering 3.2 percent drop in sales, this segment with 27 percent share in total sales in January 2011 stands at second position after foreclosure sales. Nondistressed sales had 32.1 percent share in total sales a year ago.

Moderate Decrease in Price

The increase in foreclosure sales and absence of large number of buyers caused decline of prices in Sacramento real estate market compared to last January. In January 2011, the average price of one square foot was $110.92. This is about 6.8 percent less compared to the $118.99 average per square foot price in January 2010. The drop in average square foot price was big attraction for home buyers. It gave them an opportunity to save money on their purchases. Some home buyer went for bigger homes within their budget. The average size of homes, as a result, went up 2 percent, from 1,612 sq ft in January 2010 to 1,644 sq ft this January.

The average sale price crashed down by $9,447 in a year, from $191,806 last January to $186,353 in January this year. This 4.9 percent deep this year has its impact on the average list price, which shaded $7,002 compared to last January. In January 2011, the average list price was $186,353 compared to $191,806 a year ago. The median sales price took a 3.9 percent beating. It dropped down to $160,000 in January 2011 from $166,500 exactly a year ago. This sharp fall in Sacramento real estate market is due to decrease in prices and simultaneous rise in number of sales.

Inventory Status

The average inventory status for short sales in the past one year was 10.7 months. The inventory status for foreclosures sales was the lowest at 2.1 months. In the past six months, there was slight fall in monthly average sales all segments.

Market Statistics for Sacramento County for January, 2011

The following figures show changes in Sacramento county real estate market in January 2011.

Unit Volume Data

Units Sold January, 2010 January, 2011 Change
Foreclosures Sold 513 643 25.3%
(% of total units) 43.6% 47.9%  
Short Sales Sold 286 337 17.8%
(% of total units) 24.3% 25.1%  
Nondistressed Sold 377 363 -3.7%
(% of total units) 32.1% 27.0%  
Total 1,176 1,343 14.2%

Price Data

Prices January, 2010 January, 2011 Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $118.99 $110.92 -6.8%
Square Feet 1,612 1,644 2.0%
Average List Price $193,355 $186,353 -3.6%
Average Sale Price $191,806 $182,359 -4.9%
Median Sale Price $166,500 $160,000 -3.9%

Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 1,544 7,232 4.7
Foreclosures 631 1,320 2.1
Short Sales 371 3,960 10.7
Nondistressed 544 1,958 3.6

Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 1476 7,232 4.9
Foreclosures 626 1,320 2.1
Short Sales 356 3,960 11.1
Nondistressed 496 1,958 3.9

Sacramento Real Estate Market Update, December, 2010

Sacramento real estate market update in December, 2010 shows an increase in the sales volume and a moderate fall in prices compared to the same period last year. This principal city of the Sacramento County has the highest number of real estate sales and purchases in the area. Job changes and migration are viewed as possible factors causing the increase in volume sales. However, the year-end trends do not show unexpected growth, and there is no boom in Sacramento real estate market to show compared to the market conditions exactly a year ago in this posh settlement. The sales of real estate in Sacramento City were mostly through the efforts of agents and participation of investor buyers, and foreclosure sales continued to hold the limelight in December, 2010.

Number of Units Up

Continuing the trends from neighboring Placer and El Dorado Counties, the Sacramento real estate market also witnessed considerable increase in the sale of total units. There were 2,257 units sold in December, 2010. This constitutes a healthy jump of over 10 percent compared to the situation a year ago. This growth is largely attributed to foreclosures sold, which constitute around 41.6 percent of total volume this time compared to 39 percent last December. The total sale in December 2009 was 2,035 units. Out of this, 796 were from foreclosure sales. However, a year after, foreclosure sales had gone up by 18.1 percent to 940 units.

The statistics of December, 2010 shows growth registered in all segments. There was moderate hike in both short sales and nondistressed sales, and their market shares in total volume continue to remain without any significant change. Short sales went up by 7.1 percent in December 2010 compared to the data of December 2009. This is 5.8 percent for nondistressed sales.

Price of Units Down

The price of real estate in Sacramento and its neighborhood is yet to regain the level achieved last December. The economic trends are encouraging across the nation, and this has stopped real estate prices from nose driving. But Sacramento real estate market prices in December 2010 were less than prices exactly a year ago. There was 5.9-percent fall in the per-square foot selling price due to double digit growth in foreclosure sales. It had come down to $122.07 in December 2010 from $129.69 in December 2009. This resulted in increase in average size of homes by 1.2 percent.

The hike in the average size of units sold has moderated the average listing and sales prices despite diving per-square foot prices. The average list price is down by 3.6 percent compared to last December. For average sale price, it is 4.8 percent in negative. Again foreclosure sales by institutions kept average sales price low compared to last December. This negative trend in Sacramento City real estate market in December had also its impact on the average median price, which came down to $192,000 in December 2010, about 4.5 percent fall in prices in December 2009.

The price decrease compared to December last also had its effect on the inventory status in all segments. While foreclosure sales have shortest inventory status, short sales remained for an average of 11.6 months before being sold.

Market Report for Sacramento for December, 2010

The following is the bare analysis of Sacramento City real estate market in December.

Unit Volume Data

Units Sold December, 2009 December, 2010 Change
Foreclosures Sold 796 940 18.1%
(% of total units) 39.1% 41.6%
Short Sales Sold 495 530 7.1%
(% of total units) 24.3% 23.5%
Nondistressed Sold 744 787 5.8%
(% of total units) 36.6% 34.9%
Total 2,035 2,257 10.9%

Price Data

Prices December, 2009 December, 2010 Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $129.69 $122.07 -5.9%
Square Feet 1,803 1,824 1.2%
Average List Price $237,025 $228,598 -3.6%
Average Sale Price $233,874 $222,763 -4.8%
Median Sale Price $201,000 $192,000 -4.5%

Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 2,105 11,305 5.4
Foreclosures 796 1,920 2.4
Short Sales 514 5,775 11.2
Nondistressed 798 3,624 4.5

Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 2,045 11,305 5.5
Foreclosures 775 1,920 2.5
Short Sales 496 5,775 11.6
Nondistressed 776 3,624 4.7

Sacramento County Real Estate Market Update, December 2010

Encouraging Trend for Buyers

Sacramento County real estate market update in December 2010 presents an opportunity for those looking for long-term investment in this picturesque county. The volume of houses sold in December is up, considering the same situation one year ago. The prices are lesser than what they were in December last year. The overall changes are moderate, and there is not any big gap in the volume and prices in December this year compared to the same time last year.

Moderate Increase in Volume

Sacramento real estate market has witnessed an increase in the number of units sold in December 2010. The total number of houses sold stands at 1,644 compared to 1,548 exactly one year ago. This 6.2 percent rise is moderate and mainly attributed to climbing foreclosure sales. Following the November 2010 trends, the total number of foreclosures sold has gone up by 16.6 percent, which constitute 45 percent of total units sold. There were 634 foreclosures sold in December last year. In December 2010, this number went up to 739. This noticeable increase, however, is not visible in short sales and nondistressed sales, which together constitute 55 percent of the total Sacramento real estate business.

Short sales constitute 22.6 percent of the total units sold in December 2010. However, statistics show a slight decrease of 2.1 percent compared to the available data of December last year. It stands at 371 this December compared to 379 same time last year. Sacramento County real estate nondistressed sales statistics has almost remained the same. Though there is just 0.2 percent or one unit difference between the two years, the share nondistressed sales in total units sold has come down by 4.1 percent.

Slight Decrease in Prices

The price of real estate in Sacramento County has gone down compared to December last year. Though the price remained the same as they were a month ago, there is moderate decline compared to the price one year ago. The price of per square feet witnessed a decrease amounting to 6.6 percent, from $122.94 a year ago to $114.78 at present. However, the decline in average size of homes is nominal, 1,680 sq ft in December 2009 and 1,674 sq ft in December 2010. There has been more than 5 percent slump in both average list price and average sale price. You can also notice decline in median sale price despite increase in volume. It has gone down by 6 percent, from $180,000 in December last year to $169,250 this December.

Inventory Status

Foreclosure sales continue to have the lowest inventory average of 2.4 months. However, average months to get through the inventory have increased somewhat for short sales and nondistressed sales in the past six months. Short sales have to go through 12-month inventory listing.

Sacramento County Real Estate Market Statistics for December, 2010

The following data in tabular form presents a quick review of trends of Sacramento real estate market in December 2010 compared to that of December 2009.

Unit Volume Data

Units Sold December, 2009 December, 2010 Change
Foreclosures Sold 634 739 16.6%
(% of total units) 41.0% 45.0%  
Short Sales Sold 379 371 -2.1%
(% of total units) 24.5% 22.6%  
Nondistressed Sold 535 534 -0.2%
(% of total units) 34.6% 32.5%  
Total 1548 1644 6.2%

Price Data

Prices December, 2009 December, 2010 Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $122.94 $114.78 -6.6%
Square Feet 1680 1676 -0.3%
Average List Price $207,480 $196,650 -5.2%
Average Sale Price $206,634 $192,436 -6.9%
Median Sale Price $180000 $169250 -6.0%

Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 1530 7773 5.1
Foreclosures 620 1461 2.4
Short Sales 367 4229 11.5
Nondistressed 546 2093 3.8

Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 1473 7773 5.3
Foreclosures 608 1461 2.4
Short Sales 351 4229 12.0
Nondistressed 516 2093 4.1

Sacramento County Condos – 2007 Market Year in Review

Our recent Sacramento Real Estate Year in Review article covered condos as well as other residential types like single family homes and halfplexes.  Today we turn to our attention to condos only, to see how they compare to the general category. 

When I looked at the numbers, the results were surprising given the traditional wisdom that condos are the first to fall in a down market and the last to rise in an up market.

Comparing 2006 to 2007 overall for all of Sacramento County, we find that the average condo sold in 2007 for $236,914, down 6.9% from 2006′s average of $254,370.  2007′s median price for a condo was $218,000, down 7.2% from last year’s median of $235,000.  On a sold price per square foot basis, the average condo’s value fell 10.8% during the same period, from $218.16 in 2006 to $194.51 in 2007.

As we saw for residential units overall, the numbers from December to December were more dramatic than the year to year numbers.  Sacramento County Condo values fell some 18.7% on a sold price per square foot basis from 2006 to 2007.  Though of course that’s a non-trivial drop, it’s somewhat smaller than the sold price per square foot drop of 21.8% from December to December for the residential category generally.

I suspect the traditional wisdom that condos are the big losers in a down market fails to take into effect the slight but real differences in the number of foreclosures on condos.  Among all residential categories, the number of bank owned foreclosures (REOs) sold in December was 47.2% of all sales — for condos that number was 28.1%.  Similarly in active inventory, short sales and REOs make up 55.7% of inventory for all residential units, but 46.4% for condos. 

There are two possible reasons for this.  The more obvious one is that condos are cheaper, so buyers were less overextended and therefore slightly less likely to default.  Another possibility — but I haven’t researched it so I only raise it as a conjecture — is that it’s possible more condos were owner occupied and fewer were purchased as investments. 

Whatever the reason, a slightly lower default rate has helped condos retain their value somewhat better than residential properties generally.

Sacramento County Real Estate 2007 Year In Review – Franklin / Freeport

Depending on where you focus your attention, there’s news, there’s good news, and there’s bad news.

We began our look back on Sacramento County real estate in 2007 with a look at the overall “big picture” for the Sacramento County Real Estate Market for the entire year. Later last week, we reported on one area in the county market that’s consistently held it’s value better than others and enjoy’s low inventory and brisk sales, East Sacramento.

This week we turn our attention to an area that may well be the “worst case” in terms of rising inventory and price declines for Sacramento County, Sacramento’s Franklin / Freeport area (95823). I should probably point out before we begin that I have not sampled all the MLS areas, so my sense that Franklin / Freeport may be the worst case comes from the foreclosure numbers. There may be other areas that have fewer foreclosures but more inventory or lower prices, for example.

Franklin’s decline in 2007 has been rapid. Comparing full year numbers first, the average price lost 19.2% of its value from year to year, and dropped 21.1% in terms of sold price per square foot. The median sale price in 2006 was $314,850, in 2007 it fell 20.6% to $250,000. In 2006 one per cent of sales in Franklin were foreclosures. In 2007, that number was 41.6%.

Comparing December of 2007 to December of 2006, we find that by December, the trend of selling more and more foreclosures and deep price drops had continued apace. By the end of 2006 the average sale price was $282,327. A year later the average had fallen 34.9% to $183,914. Another way to say this is that the average home in Franklin lost slightly more than 1/3 of its value in a year. On a sold price per square foot basis, Franklin closed out 2006 at $200.21 per square foot, and had fallen to $126.61 a year later, a decline of 35.8%.

The percentages of short sales and foreclosures available in Franklin / Freeport are staggering. Almost three fourths (73.9%) of inventory in Franklin / Freeport is either a short sale (35.9%) or foreclosure (38.1%). At the same time, if you needed a case study of REOs outselling short sales, Franklin / Freeport is it. Last month no short sales closed, but twenty-five of the twenty-nine closed sales in the area were bank owned properties. That works out to 86.2%, or close to 7/8 of all sales.

The contrast between East Sacramento on the one hand and Franklin / Freeport on the other shows how local real estate markets are. East Sac enjoys less than three months of inventory and a brisk seller’s market where the prices have remained flat while nationwide prices are falling, while Franklin / Freeport currently has almost two years (23.6 months) of inventory, and homes there have lost two thirds of it’s value in a year.

If you’re a buyer or seller, the right question to ask is not “How’s the Market” overall, but “How’s the Market” for your particular area. Is there an area you’re interested in particularly? If so please contact us and we’d be happy to get you specific market data or comparable sales.

The Sacramento Real Estate Market Killed My Father

Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya.  You killed my father.  Prepare to die.

This is a tale about blaming the real estate market for whatever else is wrong.

This is also a tale about a bit of ugly sheudenfreude on my part.  The other day I was reading Sacramento News and Review, and there was an article in there about the Sacramento Bee’s stock prices.  While the average Sacramento County home owner’s investment lost 20-30% of its value over the last two years (1st chart, below), the average investor in McClatchy Stock (Sac Bee’s parent company), saw the value of their investment fall 75% (second chart, below).

Normally I’d feel bad for the folks over at the Bee — or at least, I might feel neutral.  But I have to admit, coming on the heels of these folks babbling every other day about the “housing crisis” and “mortgage meltdown” for the last two years, I didn’t feel a heck of a lot of sympathy.   If a guy who invests a dollar ends up with 75 cents, and that is a “meltdown”, what word might be appropriate for a guy who invests a dollar and ends up with a quarter?  Catastrophe?  Unmitigated disaster?  How about THE END OF LIFE AS WE KNOW IT!

But wait — The Sacramento Bee has identified the culprit here.  You see, the mortgage meltdown and the END OF LIFE AS WE KNOW IT at McClatchy aren’t unrelated — it’s the housing market’s fault that the Sacramento Bee’s stock is in the toilet!

Explaining the downturn in July, the Sacramento Bee’s Dale Kasler wrote:

“The downturn mainly reflected a significant drop in ad sales, especially at McClatchy’s California and Florida papers. Nearly three-quarters of the drop in ad revenue came from those two states, which are suffering from real estate woes. Real estate advertising was down 32 percent in California and Florida, causing a spillover effect that depressed other ad categories.”

Wow, really?  That’s quite a meltdown indeed, if now we’re causing a “spillover effect” that’s depressing other ad categories.  How does that work, exactly?  I suppose the sales manager at Folsom Lake Ford said to himself, “Well, hmm, the houses aren’t selling that well any more — no point in advertising the new Explorers this week.  Let’s pull the ad.”

Spillover effect.  OK I’ll bite, let’s discuss spillover, shall we?  With houses harder to sell, not easier, you might expect that instead of spending less on real estate advertising, we might end up spending more.  Then again, maybe your former advertisers didn’t like the fact that your constant use of terms like “Meltdown” and “Crisis” is scaring the buyers off day in and day out, while prices are better than they’ve been from a buyer’s point of view in two years and interest is still quite low.

“My name is Inigo Montoya, Sacramento Bee Staff Writer.  My yellow journalism killed my stock prices.  Prepare to watch me blame the housing market — again!”

By the way, if there are any Sac Bee readers out there who are still wondering, JFK was not killed by Adjustable Rate Mortgages resetting.

image

 

image