A tougher call for younger house hunters, especially in California, if mortgage rates rise

Buying a home is 23% cheaper than renting nationwide for millennials and now is the best time to buy since 2012 when interest rates were a tad lower.

Trulia’s Rent vs. Buy Report has traditionally assumed a 30-year fixed rate mortgage with a 20% down payment for households moving every seven years. With these assumptions, buying is 36% cheaper than renting on a national basis, based on September home prices. That’s the best differential since 2012 when it was 38% cheaper to buy than rent. Buying is also cheaper than renting in each of the nation’s 100 largest metros.

However, using the Census’ 2014 American Community Survey and a new Trulia consumer poll, we’ve found that the math is different for young households (ages 25-34), who tend to move every five years (*) and can only afford up to a 10% down payment (**). This edition of Rent vs. Buy crunches the numbers for these prospective home buyers.

To compare the costs of owning and renting for young home buyers, we also assumed a 3.85% mortgage rate on a 30-year fixed-rate loan, itemized federal tax deductions and a 25% tax bracket. With those assumptions, buying is not only 23% cheaper than renting nationally, it is also only cheaper than renting in 98 of the nation’s top 100 markets.

Trulia_RvB_TimeSeries_Oct2015

But personal choices aside, here are the current economic conditions that influence today’s market. Nationally, home price growth has outpaced rent growth since 2012. That favors the rent side of the buy vs. rent equation. However, interest rates have returned to near historic lows, now at about 3.85%, after climbing to 4% or higher in 2013 and 2014. In October 2012, rates were about 3.4% for a 30-year-fixed rate mortgage. In that year, young households found that it was 28% cheaper to buy than rent.

Cheaper to Rent in Honolulu and Silicon Valley
The rent vs. buy gap differs vastly across metros, largely because home prices and rents, property taxes, and home-price appreciation differs by metro. Taking these factors into account, young home buyers in the nation’s 100 markets would find that buying a home ranges from being 5% more expensive than renting in Honolulu to being 46% cheaper to buy a home in Houston.

The only other metro in the top 100 where buying is more expensive than renting a home for young buyers is San Jose, where they’d pay 2% more to buy a home than to rent. Rounding out the top 10 is New York, where buying is now 11% cheaper for younger consumers than renting.

Our rent vs. buy metric is especially tight for young prospective buyers in California. Of the 10 markets nationwide where buying vs. renting is a tougher call, seven are in the Golden State: San Jose, Orange County, San Francisco, Oakland, Sacramento, San Diego, and Ventura County.

Trulia_RvB_10Renting_Oct2015

Where Renting Beats Buying (and Where It’s a Tough Call)
# U.S. Metro Median Home Price, Sept 2015 Median Rent, Sept 2015 Cost of Buying vs. Renting (%), Sept 2015
1 Honolulu, HI $612,642 $2,500 5%
2 San Jose, CA $907,806 $3,500 2%
3 Orange County, CA $639,129 $2,800 -5%
4 San Francisco, CA $1,100,000 $4,400 -7%
5 Oakland, CA $617,357 $2,800 -7%
6 Sacramento, CA $326,910 $1,650 -8%
7 Newark, NJ-PA $326,045 $2,200 -10%
8 San Diego, CA $488,959 $2,325 -10%
9 Ventura County, CA $514,053 $2,500 -11%
10 New York, NY-NJ $437,834 $2,350 -11%
Note: Positive numbers mean that buying costs more than renting. Click here to download the fullRent vs. Buy cost considerations for the 100 largest U.S. metros.

 

Southern, Midwestern Housing Markets Great for Young Buyers
Buying is clearly a better deal in many Southern markets. Metros in Texas, Florida and Louisiana dominate the top ten list of places where young households will find buying an easier call. In No. 1 Houston, for instance, it is 46% cheaper for younger buyers to buy than rent.

Trulia_RvB_10Buying_Oct2015

Where Buying a Home Beats Renting
# U.S. Metro Median Home Price, Sept 2015 Median Rent, Sept 2015 Cost of Buying vs. Renting (%), Sept 2015
1 Houston, TX $162,784 $1,550 -46%
2 Baton Rouge, LA $154,940 $1,395 -45%
3 Syracuse, NY $118,999 $1,375 -44%
4 Fort Lauderdale, FL $200,734 $1,750 -44%
5 Miami, FL $241,740 $1,955 -43%
6 New Orleans, LA $169,688 $1,500 -43%
7 Tampa, FL $151,974 $1,300 -42%
8 Oklahoma City, OK $130,095 $1,195 -42%
9 Detroit, MI $60,465 $850 -42%
10 San Antonio, TX $141,907 $1,295 -42%
Note: Negative numbers mean that buying costs less than renting. Click here to download the fullRent vs. Buy cost considerations for the 100 largest U.S. metros.

 

Rising Prices, Rents in Some Markets Spur Big Swings in Rent vs. Buy Math
Many metros have seen drastic swings in our rent vs. buy metric since 2012 when the housing market first started to turn around. That’s largely because of rebounding home prices and swings in how much prices rise relative to rents, and vice-versa.

In Las Vegas, for example, it is now 20% cheaper to buy than rent. In 2012, it was a whopping 43% cheaper to buy than rent in that metro. Much of this change is due to the fact that price increases outpaced rents in Las Vegas. The median cost of a Las Vegas home has soared to $194,789, up from $124,575 in 2012. Median monthly rents, meanwhile, have risen just $100 in the same period to $1,250. This difference led to an almost 23 percentage point drop in the advantage of buying vs. renting.

Trulia_RvB_Better2012_Oct2015

Where House Hunters Should Have Bought in 2012
# U.S. Metro Cost of Buying vs. Renting (%), Sept 2012 Cost of Buying vs. Renting (%), Sept 2015 Point Difference in Cost of Buying vs. Renting, 2012-2015
1 Las Vegas, NV -43% -20% +23%
2 Riverside, CA -41% -21% +20%
3 Bakersfield, CA -46% -26% +20%
4 Sacramento, CA -27% -8% +20%
5 Phoenix, AZ -41% -23% +18%
6 San Diego, CA -27% -10% +17%
7 Fresno, CA -38% -22% +16%
8 Ventura County, CA -27% -11% +16%
9 WarrenTroyFarmington Hills, MI -45% -29% +15%
10 Orange County, CA -21% -5% +15%
Note: Negative numbers mean that buying costs less than renting. Click here to download the fullRent vs. Buy cost considerations for the 100 largest U.S. metros.

In some markets, rent growth has outpaced home price growth. That has made home buying an even better financial choice vs. renting in those markets now than in 2012. However, the changes haven’t been as drastic as in Las Vegas.

For example, in San Antonio—which tops the list of 10 metros where buying a home is an even better deal vs. renting now than it was three years ago—younger home buyers would find buying now almost 42% cheaper than renting, up from 33% cheaper in 2012. That makes for an eight-percentage point difference in our buy vs. rent metric.

Higher Mortgage Rates Could Spur Renting in California
Many economists predict that the Federal Reserve Bank will raise interest rates, now near historic lows, by the year’s end. Nationally, rates would have to nearly double to about 6.5% to equalize the buy vs. rent equation for young buyers. Still, an increase of 25-50 basis points could push mortgage rates to 4.15% – 4.4%. That would make the costs of renting about the same as buying in some large California markets

 

Posted 8:34 AM

Share |


No Comments


Post a Comment
Name
Required
E-Mail
Required (Not Displayed)
Comment
Required


All comments are moderated and stripped of HTML.
Submission Validation
Required
CAPTCHA
Change the CAPTCHA codeSpeak the CAPTCHA code
 
Enter the Validation Code from above.
NOTICE: This blog and website are made available by the publisher for educational and informational purposes only. It is not be used as a substitute for competent insurance, legal, or tax advice from a licensed professional in your state. By using this blog site you understand that there is no broker client relationship between you and the blog and website publisher.
Blog Archive


View Mobile Version