Sunday, March 27, 2016

Продажа недвижимости за наличные в 2015 году - самая низкая за последние 7 лет

CoreLogic - cash sales share in 2015 lowest in seven years

Cash sales accounted for 33.4% of total home sales in December 2015 and 33.9% of total home sales for the full year 2015. The full year 2015 cash sales share was the lowest since 2008. The December cash sales share was  down 3.3 percentage points year over year from 36.7% in December 2014. On a month-over-month basis, the cash sales share fell by 2.8 percentage points in December 2015 compared with November 2015. The month over month decrease in cash sales share was larger than normal for the month of December, indicating that the elevated share reported for November, and attributed to the new federal mortgage rules (TRID), was temporary.  The cash sales share peaked in January 2011 when cash transactions accounted for 46.6% of total home sales nationally. Prior to the housing crisis, the cash sales share of total home sales averaged approximately 25%. If the cash sales share continues to fall at the same rate it did in December 2015, the share should hit 25% by mid-2017.

Real estate-owned (REO) sales had the largest cash sales share in December 2015 at 59.2%. Resales had the next highest cash sales share at 33.4%, followed by short sales at 30.9% and newly constructed homes at 15.4%. While the percentage of REO sales that were all-cash transactions remained high, REO transactions accounted for only 6.9% of all sales in December 2015. In January 2011 when the cash sales share was at its peak, REO sales represented 23.9% of total home sales. Resales typically make up the majority of home sales (about 79% in December 2015), and therefore have the biggest impact on the total cash sales share.  Delaware had the largest cash sales share of any state at 57%, followed by Alabama (50.1%), New York (46.5%), Florida (46.3%) and Mississippi (45%). Of the nation’s largest 100 Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) measured by population, Detroit, Mich. had the highest cash sales share at 62.7%, followed by West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Delray Beach, Fla. (53.4%), Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, Fla. (53.2%), Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach-Deerfield Beach, Fla. (51.2%) and North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, Fla. (51%). Syracuse, N.Y. had the lowest cash sales share at 12.5%.
Fourth-quarter GDP revised up; corporate profits fall
US economic growth slowed in the fourth quarter, but not as sharply as previously estimated, with fairly strong consumer spending offsetting the drag from efforts by businesses to reduce an inventory overhang.  Gross domestic product increased at a 1.4% annual rate instead of the previously reported 1.0% pace, the Commerce Department said on Friday in its third GDP estimate. GDP growth was initially estimated to have risen at only a 0.7% rate. The economy grew at a rate of 2.0% in the third quarter and expanded 2.4% for all of 2015.  Economists polled by Reuters had expected that fourth-quarter GDP growth would be unrevised at a 1.0% rate.  The upward revisions reflected a stronger pace of consumer spending than previously estimated.
Consumer spending, which accounts for more than two thirds of US economic activity, rose at a 2.4% pace rather than the 2.0% rate reported last month. That reflected more consumption of services than previously estimated.  The fairly solid pace of consumer spending underscores the economy's underlying strength and should further allay fears of a recession, which triggered a massive stock market sell-off early this year.  Spending is being supported by a tightening labor market, which is steadily lifting wages, and rising house prices.  Gasoline prices around $2 per gallon are also helping to underpin household discretionary spending.  Inventory investment was revised lower. Still, inventories remain high relative to domestic demand.  Businesses accumulated $78.3 billion worth of inventory rather than the $81.7 billion reported last month. As a result, inventories subtracted 0.22 percentage point from GDP growth instead of the previously reported 0.14 percentage point.
Zillow - February market report: peeking at home value peaks
Median home values in more than a quarter of the nation’s metro housing markets are currently, or were recently, as high as they’ve ever been.
In February, home values rose 4.3% year-over-year to a Zillow Home Value Index of $184,600.  Median home values in more than a quarter of the nation’s metro housing markets are currently, or were recently (within the last year), at peak and as high as they’ve ever been, according to the February Zillow Real Estate Market Report. But what do home value peaks really mean?  As with most things in real estate, the answer depends on where you are.  The national Zillow Home Value Index was $184,600 in February, 5.9% below the record median home value set in mid-2007. But over the past year, many housing markets in the South, especiallyTexasandTennessee, have joined many Western housing markets in blowing past their previous median home value highs.Dallashome values set a new record at $180,700 in February, up 13.7% from last February. Nashville home values rose 9.5% to a median of $189,100.
In a general sense, the idea of home values being at their “peak” is easy to take out of context. In a normal market – in which nominal home values grow fairly consistently year after year at a roughly 2% to 3% annual pace – home values are always reaching new peaks. In this example, home values in Anywhere,USA, can be reliably counted upon to be modestly higher this year than they were last year, and to be a bit higher next year than they are this year. Aside from periodic slowdowns or small dips in home values caused by local economic factors, nominal home values should always just keep chugging slowly upward in normal times.  But the past decade-plus has been anything but normal for US housing, which has distorted this definition of “peak” home values. By now we’re all familiar with housing’s rough arc in the 21st century: a rapid acceleration in home value growth between roughly 2000 and 2007, followed by an almost equally rapid decline from May 2007 through early 2012 and then a steadier climb back again in more recent years. The very broad nature of last decade’s housing boom and bust means that the majority of local markets have followed a similar path as the US as a whole, though the severity of their local booms and busts and exact peak and trough dates will vary somewhat.
But not all local markets experienced the housing boom, bust and recovery the same way. Some markets just kept chugging away slowly, never really falling much in the first place. It has taken others years to slowly claw their way back to pre-recession levels after a difficult bust. And still others had only a mild bust period, recovered quickly and have been setting new peaks for years.  Pittsburgh is a good example of a market that has just kept chugging along, with no clear boom and bust period, only steady growth over the past two decades. Rather than experience a sharp dip during the bust, home values in the Pittsburgh area more or less flattened out without falling too much between 2008 and 2013, before resuming their somewhat more rapid rise during the recovery. Far from being a cause for concern, the fact that home values in Pittsburg hare currently hovering very near their “peak” is really just a sign of remarkable stability in the market.  Bostonis an example of a market that had a clear run-up in home values, a distinct decline during the bust, and a long recovery over the past few years. During the boom years, home values in Boston peaked early relative to the nation, at $384,900 in September 2005. What followed was a long six-year period of falling home values, reaching bottom in November 2011 at $311,800, a drop of almost 19%. It took until January 2016 for home values in Greater Boston to surpass their prior peak. Home values in Greater Boston are, after years of bust and recovery, finally starting to break new ground again, and look to be on a sustainable growth path going forward.
Finally, a market like Denver is indicative of a market that quickly shook off the bust and has taken off like a rocket in recent years. Prior to the recession, home values in theDenverarea peaked at $237,600 in May 2006. During the bust, home values fell to a low of $207,300 by August 2011. By July of 2013, Denver-area home values had already surpassed their earlier peak, and haven’t slowed down since. Currently, home values inDenverstand at $326,300 – 37.3% higher than May 2006 values, and up a whopping 57.4% from their August 2011 bottom.  This rapid growth in home values is largely driven byDenver’s own massive population growth over the past decade-plus, combined with a limited supply of new homes for sale. This kind of rapid and unflagging growth could be worrisome, and may indicate a local bubble starting to form inDenverand similar markets like the Bay Area. But even so, rapid growth on its own isn’t enough to indicate a bubble as long as this growth is driven by solid underlying economic fundamentals like strong job and wage growth, true housing demand and limited supply and not rampant speculation – which is the case inDenver.  So while taking a peek at peak home values naturally piques our interest and is useful in determining how far some markets have come and how far others still have to go, interpreting what it really means is all a matter of perspective.
In February, the median US home value rose 0.2% from January and 4.3% from February 2015, according to the Zillow Home Value Index. US home values have grown on a year-over-year basis for 44 straight months.  Home values in 26 of the nation’s 35 largest metro markets grew faster year-over-year than the nation’s 4.3% annual pace in February. Home values grew by more than 10% per year in six of those large metro markets: Denver (up 14.5% year-over-year), Dallas (13.7%), Portland (13.4%), San Jose (11.4%), San Francisco (10.9%) and Miami (10.5%). None of the nation’s largest metros experienced annual home value declines in February.  The US median rent in January was $1,383 per month, up 0.1% from January and 2.6% from February 2015, according to the Zillow Rent Index. US rents have grown year-over-year for 42 consecutive months.  Median rents in all but one of the nation’s 35 largest metro markets grew year-over-year to some extent, with only Cleveland experiencing an annual decline (-1.2% from February 2015). Rents grew fastest year-over-year in the San Francisco (up 10.5% from January 2015), Portland (up 8.7%) and San Jose (up 8%) metros.
Outlook
Looking ahead, Zillow expects national home values to continue growing, rising another 2.3% through February 2017. Rents are also expected to keep growing over the next year, at a 1.7% pace through February 2017.  The new home value records being set in a number of markets mean we’re no longer making up ground lost during the housing recession –we’re laying a new path forward, based on demand for housing and economic growth throughout the economy. In some markets, these new highs are a return to normalcy, and in others are a reminder that not all markets react the same to broader economic trends.  Finally, the fact that many other markets are still off pre-recession peaks by double digits – places like Las Vegas (down 33.8% from Q2 2006 peaks) and Orlando (off by 29.5% from prior peaks) – may not even mean those markets are far from full recovery. Instead, their long path back just highlights how extraordinarily inflated home values were in those areas during the housing bubble.
US weekly jobless claims up
The number of Americans filing for unemployment benefits rose last week while revisions for prior weeks showed the labor market was much stronger than previously thought.  Initial claims for state unemployment benefits increased 6,000 to a seasonally adjusted 265,000 for the week ended March 19, the Labor Department said on Thursday. The prior week's claims were revised to show 6,000 fewer applications received than previously reported.  Economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims rising to 268,000 in the latest week. The government also revised data going back to 2011, which showed claims trending lower than previously reported. Claims for the week ended March 5 were the lowest since November 1973.
WSJ - more Americans are again moving to suburbs than cities
Economists to real-estate agents have debated  whether the housing boom and bust of the last decade has dramatically remade the way Americans live or merely created a temporary disruption.  US Census data released Thursday provides strong support for the latter thesis—that shifts in where Americans move were merely temporary, according to analysis by Jed Kolko, a senior fellow at the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at the University of California, Berkeley.  For one thing, the rate at which Americans are moving to the suburbs is once again outpacing the rate at which they are moving to cities. That picks up on a decades long trend that only very temporarily reversed during the recession.  Urban counties grew by 0.8% in 2015 to roughly 77 million people, compared with suburban counties, which grew by nearly 1% to 159 million people. Mr. Kolko defines counties as urban based on how dense they were as of the 2010 census.  Overall, theUSpopulation grew by 0.8% from 2014 to 2015, or a difference of about 2.5 million people.  Suburbs have been outpacing cities in population growth for decades. In 2001, suburbs grew about 1.2% while cities grew by about 0.7%.  The trend was exacerbated by the housing boom, when easy mortgages helped buyers afford homes being built at a rapid pace in far-out suburbs.  In 2006, suburbs grew by 1.5% while cities instead actually lost nearly 0.4% of their population.
Cities grew faster than suburbs for one year during the last decade, in 2011. While much has been written about the revival of cities, the overall population trends underscore that people flocking to cities remain a select class, mostly of the young, educated and affluent who can afford rising prices. In the meantime,Americaoverall continues to suburbanize.  “Rich, young people are outbidding others for urban housing and so the faster growth in the suburbs certainly reflects tight housing supply in dense neighborhoods,” Mr. Kolko said.  Another decadeslong trend that has re-emerged is the growth of the South and the West at the expense of the Northeast and the Midwest. The South and West both had population growth of 1.2% in 2015, far ahead of 0.2% growth in the Northeast andMidwest.  During the aftermath of the housing bust, the South and West saw sharp declines in the rate of population growth, while the Northeast andMidwestheld relatively steady, although they continued to grow more slowly.  Some familiar metro areas also emerged as big population losers and winners.  Austin was the biggest population gainer for four years running from 2011 to 2014. But this year it was surpassed by Cape Coral-Fort Myers,Fla.—also the leader in population growth during the bubble from 2004 to 2006. Youngstown, Ohio, has been the biggest population loser since 2010 and continued to hold that title. It also lost the most population for most of the boom from 2003 to 2005,  but it was surpassed for a few years byNew Orleans and Detroit.
Chris McLaughlin
Keller Williams

No comments:

Post a Comment