Realtor.com® Weekly Housing Trends: Sellers Dip Their Toe Back Into the Market

New listings declines show signs of life and total inventory declines flatten over last week

News provided by

May 14, 2020, 06:00 ET

SANTA CLARA, Calif., May 14, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Realtor.com^® today released its weekly housing trends report for the week ending May 9, which shows sellers are beginning to return to the market . After several weeks of near 40 percent declines year-over-year, new listings made a big jump towards positive territory last week with a -29 percent decline year-over-year.

"While new listings are still declining on a yearly basis, last week's jump shows some sellers are ready for a summer home sale -- a positive sign for the market," said Danielle Hale, chief economist for realtor.com^®. "But despite this uptick, time on market continues to increase and there's a long road ahead to getting back to last year's pace of new sellers."

Key Findings for the Week Ending May 9:

New listings are down 29 percent year-over-year. Declines persist nationwide but momentum has shifted in a positive direction
Total inventory was down 19 percent year-over-year, unchanged from the previous week.
Time on market was 13 days slower than last year on average, the biggest increase in time on market since 2013
Median listing prices are still growing at a slower pace than pre-COVID, but they may regain momentum in the weeks to come

	Week ending May 9	Week ending May 2	Week ending April 25	First Two Weeks March
New Listings	-29% YOY	-39% YOY	-43% YOY	+5% YOY
Total Listings	-19% YOY	-19% YOY	-17% YOY	-16% YOY
Time on Market	13 days slower YOY	11 days slower YOY	9 days slower YOY	-4 days faster YOY
Median Listing Prices	1.4% YOY	1.6% YOY	1.6% YOY	+4% YOY

New listings: After a few weeks near -40 percent, the year-over-year decline in newly listed for-sale homes took another step in the right direction nationwide with the size of declines down just less than 30 percent. We still see fewer sellers putting homes up for sale than last spring nationwide and in all large markets, which is unsurprising in this challenging market, but the momentum has shifted in a positive direction.

In the first two weeks in March (our pre-COVID-19 pandemic base), new listings were increasing 5 percent year-over-year on average. In the most recent three weeks ending April 25, May 2, and May 9, the volume of newly listed properties decreased by 43 percent, 39 percent, and 29 percent year-over-year, respectively. The continued declines in newly listed properties mean that we've yet to see supply turn back to normal. However, some improvement could be on the horizon as more than two thirds (75 of 97) of large metros are seeing smaller declines, including the three largest markets in the country New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

Asking prices: Sellers look for minimal home price growth, and the mix of homes for-sale appears to be reverting back toward pricier properties.

In the first two weeks of March (our pre-COVID-19 base), median listing prices were increasing 4.4 percent year-over-year on average. In the most recent three weeks ending April 25, May 2, and May 9, the median U.S. listing price posted an increase of 1.6 percent, 1.6 percent and 1.4 percent year-over-year, respectively. While current price gains remain below pre COVID-19 levels, we expect them to regain momentum in the weeks to come as sellers regain confidence and buyers slowly resume activity. Locally, 70 of 99 metros saw asking prices increase over last year.

Total Active Listings: Limited homes for sale continues to win out this week in the tug of war between listing declines and homes sitting on the market longer. Total active listing declines were unchanged compared to last week but remain slightly larger than the pre-COVID period.

Weekly data shows total active listings declined 19 percent compared to a year ago as the lack of sellers is currently outweighing the extra time homes spend on the market. Two forces are influencing the change in listings: 1) the sharp drop in new listings year-over-year (downward pressure) and 2) longer time on market as buyers are now more hesitant than last year to make major purchases in an uncertain economy (upward pressure).

Time on market: Time on market continues to grow longer as a result of fewer new home listings coming to market year-over-year and properties sitting on the market longer. Time on market rose by double-digit percent growth nationwide and in three-quarters of large metros.

In the first two weeks in March (our pre-COVID-19 base), days on market were four days faster than last year on average. The trend in time on market began to slow in mid-March, but the indicator didn't register an increase until April. Data for the week ending May 9 showed that time on market was 13 days or 19 percent greater than last year, the biggest increase in time on market since 2013. It's visible in local data as well as the national figures, with 84 of the largest 99 metros showing similar double-digit percent increases in time on market from one year ago.

cbsa_title	hh_rank	median_listing_ price_yy	median_dom_yy	active_listing_ count_yy	new_listing_ count_yy	new_listing_ share_yy	price_reduced_ count_yy	price_reduced_ share_yy
new york-newark-jersey city, ny-nj-pa	1	-2.4%	33.3%	-22.3%	-55.6%	-3.4%	-69.2%	-3.2%
los angeles-long beach-anaheim, ca	2	13.1%	54.8%	-18.5%	-18.0%	0.1%	-38.2%	-1.5%
chicago-naperville-elgin, il-in-wi	3	-3.2%	51.3%	-20.7%	-31.0%	-1.4%	-42.4%	-2.1%
dallas-fort worth-arlington, tx	4	-4.1%	27.3%	-14.2%	-8.7%	0.6%	-31.6%	-1.9%
houston-the woodlands-sugar land, tx	5	-1.6%	24.0%	-9.5%	-13.3%	-0.3%	-24.8%	-1.2%
philadelphia-camden-wilmington, pa-nj-de-md	6	8.7%	51.1%	-39.2%	-55.1%	-2.6%	-69.1%	-3.9%
washington-arlington-alexandria, dc-va-md-wv	7	4.3%	41.9%	-30.7%	-39.0%	-1.5%	-44.3%	-1.3%
miami-fort lauderdale-west palm beach, fl	8	-2.5%	14.8%	-10.2%	-23.5%	-0.8%	-40.0%	-1.7%
atlanta-sandy springs-roswell, ga	9	-1.4%	19.6%	-15.7%	-21.2%	-0.6%	-31.0%	-1.4%
boston-cambridge-newton, ma-nh	10	2.6%	55.6%	-28.8%	-30.8%	-0.3%	-50.9%	-2.1%
san francisco-oakland-hayward, ca	11	4.9%	42.9%	-20.6%	-19.9%	0.1%	-48.4%	-2.0%
detroit-warren-dearborn, mi	12	-3.8%	88.6%	-10.7%	-3.3%	0.9%	-62.3%	-4.3%
phoenix-mesa-scottsdale, az	13	1.1%	0.0%	-23.7%	-21.3%	0.3%	-40.4%	-2.5%
seattle-tacoma-bellevue, wa	14	-4.6%	32.1%	-21.2%	-53.7%	-8.7%	-64.0%	-5.4%
minneapolis-st. paul-bloomington, mn-wi	15	0.0%	23.5%	-10.3%	-12.7%	-0.3%	-9.9%	0.0%
riverside-san bernardino-ontario, ca	16	1.7%	30.6%	-25.8%	-19.9%	0.7%	-32.0%	-0.6%
tampa-st. petersburg-clearwater, fl	17	1.8%	10.3%	-17.9%	-23.0%	-0.5%	-32.0%	-1.6%
san diego-carlsbad, ca	18	4.2%	50.0%	-28.4%	-23.1%	0.8%	-42.8%	-1.6%
st. louis, mo-il	19	6.0%	17.9%	-21.3%	-20.9%	0.0%	-42.9%	-2.1%
denver-aurora-lakewood, co	20	4.6%	44.8%	-21.2%	-20.8%	0.1%	-35.8%	-1.9%
baltimore-columbia-towson, md	21	0.0%	35.7%	-32.7%	-39.1%	-1.0%	-49.9%	-2.1%
pittsburgh, pa	22	15.4%	59.3%	-18.1%	-61.5%	-4.9%	-78.9%	-5.4%
portland-vancouver-hillsboro, or-wa	23	2.3%	50.0%	-24.0%	-38.9%	-2.4%	-25.5%	0.1%
charlotte-concord-gastonia, nc-sc	24	0.0%	12.0%	-22.0%	-21.8%	0.0%	-44.6%	-2.5%
orlando-kissimmee-sanford, fl	25	0.0%	14.0%	-7.3%	-25.2%	-1.8%	-25.4%	-1.4%
cleveland-elyria, oh	26	5.0%	18.5%	-31.0%	-29.7%	0.2%	-41.1%	-1.1%
san antonio-new braunfels, tx	27	-3.2%	23.5%	-7.2%	-17.6%	-1.0%	-7.8%	0.0%
cincinnati, oh-ky-in	28	11.3%	20.9%	-32.3%	-35.8%	-0.6%	-39.3%	-0.7%
sacramento--roseville--arden-arcade, ca	29	2.0%	29.4%	-17.7%	-24.9%	-1.1%	-39.9%	-2.3%
kansas city, mo-ks	30	7.2%	52.4%	-31.3%	-40.7%	-1.5%	-40.8%	-0.9%
columbus, oh	31	6.6%	41.7%	-24.4%	-26.1%	-0.3%	-35.4%	-1.3%
indianapolis-carmel-anderson, in	32	0.0%	32.6%	-21.3%	-38.8%	-2.8%	-10.1%	1.7%
las vegas-henderson-paradise, nv	33	2.8%	23.8%	-8.8%	-52.9%	-6.8%	-46.1%	-3.5%
austin-round rock, tx	34	0.0%	6.4%	-11.8%	-9.4%	0.3%	-16.0%	-0.4%
nashville-davidson--murfreesboro--franklin, tn	35	2.7%	8.8%	-16.9%	-7.3%	1.2%	-32.7%	-1.3%
san jose-sunnyvale-santa clara, ca	36	1.9%	56.0%	-27.4%	-36.0%	-1.8%	-44.7%	-1.6%
virginia beach-norfolk-newport news, va-nc	37	7.3%	22.7%	-30.6%	-33.5%	-0.4%	-48.1%	-1.3%
milwaukee-waukesha-west allis, wi	38	2.6%	27.5%	-15.5%	-27.9%	-1.8%	-67.8%	-9.0%
providence-warwick, ri-ma	39	5.3%	40.0%	-34.9%	-42.9%	-1.3%	-48.4%	-1.0%
jacksonville, fl	40	-3.1%	3.2%	-9.7%	-18.5%	-0.8%	-10.7%	0.0%
oklahoma city, ok	41	3.1%	14.3%	-14.9%	-9.9%	0.5%	-30.1%	-1.5%
louisville/jefferson county, ky-in	42	-3.4%	23.9%	-25.0%	-32.1%	-1.0%	-39.8%	-1.4%
memphis, tn-ms-ar	43	8.0%	9.3%	-23.4%	-19.5%	0.5%	-38.6%	-1.3%
new orleans-metairie, la	44	0.0%	22.4%	-12.9%	-31.5%	-1.7%	-34.6%	-1.6%
richmond, va	45	2.9%	17.8%	-17.0%	-30.9%	-1.8%	-44.7%	-2.2%
raleigh, nc	46	-2.1%	15.7%	-13.9%	-31.2%	-2.1%	-44.7%	-3.1%
buffalo-cheektowaga-niagara falls, ny	47	4.5%	84.2%	-29.4%	-50.2%	-3.9%	-56.4%	-2.1%
hartford-west hartford-east hartford, ct	48	3.6%	40.9%	-32.7%	-39.7%	-0.8%	-56.8%	-2.0%
birmingham-hoover, al	49	2.0%	14.3%	-18.1%	-10.1%	0.8%	-26.8%	-0.6%
rochester, ny	50	10.9%	72.7%	-29.1%	-41.1%	-2.2%	-55.3%	-1.9%
tucson, az	51	0.1%	3.9%	-22.7%	-16.4%	0.7%	-40.4%	-1.7%
salt lake city, ut	52	3.5%	16.1%	-20.4%	-29.8%	-1.7%	-22.7%	-0.1%
grand rapids-wyoming, mi	53	4.1%	96.7%	-9.8%	-17.8%	-1.2%	-48.4%	-3.0%
tulsa, ok	54	10.4%	12.2%	-22.9%	-26.6%	-0.4%	-38.6%	-1.3%
albany-schenectady-troy, ny	55	6.7%	43.1%	-28.6%	-50.2%	-2.8%	-67.3%	-3.1%
albuquerque, nm	56	9.1%	17.8%	-30.2%	-37.6%	-1.1%	-32.9%	-0.2%
omaha-council bluffs, ne-ia	57	5.0%	75.0%	-9.0%	-16.7%	-1.1%	-37.0%	-1.8%
worcester, ma-ct	58	5.5%	43.6%	-28.9%	-30.7%	-0.3%	-50.2%	-2.3%
knoxville, tn	59	5.0%	10.7%	-26.4%	-17.7%	1.0%	-39.8%	-1.5%
bridgeport-stamford-norwalk, ct	60	-1.3%	28.3%	-32.3%	-42.3%	-0.9%	-55.6%	-1.7%
greenville-anderson-mauldin, sc	61	-1.4%	22.2%	-8.6%	-20.5%	-1.1%	-23.3%	-1.0%
north port-sarasota-bradenton, fl	62	-1.9%	2.4%	-16.6%	-8.5%	0.5%	-35.1%	-1.5%
new haven-milford, ct	63	0.0%	30.6%	-33.1%	-42.0%	-0.9%	-61.0%	-2.2%
dayton, oh	64	19.4%	59.5%	-49.1%	-52.9%	-0.8%	-19.6%	2.8%
urban honolulu, hi	65	-14.0%	17.5%	30.3%	-16.3%	-2.5%	-35.5%	-2.6%
allentown-bethlehem-easton, pa-nj	66	20.3%	32.7%	-49.3%	-66.3%	-3.0%	-84.4%	-4.1%
columbia, sc	67	2.5%	-1.9%	-24.5%	-25.1%	-0.1%	-42.9%	-1.6%
baton rouge, la	68	0.4%	28.6%	-10.3%	-25.5%	-1.1%	-41.8%	-2.3%
greensboro-high point, nc	69	3.3%	15.1%	-21.1%	-23.0%	-0.2%	-22.8%	-0.1%
fresno, ca	70	3.1%	30.8%	-33.6%	-24.4%	1.4%	-43.4%	-1.0%
charleston-north charleston, sc	71	3.4%	10.1%	-18.6%	-11.9%	0.6%	-35.9%	-1.7%
little rock-north little rock-conway, ar	72	12.1%	9.4%	-33.0%	-21.8%	1.2%	-55.3%	-2.5%
cape coral-fort myers, fl	73	9.7%	0.0%	-24.7%	-9.0%	0.9%	-45.9%	-1.8%
akron, oh	74	0.0%	47.6%	-23.6%	-26.9%	-0.5%	-39.9%	-1.7%
el paso, tx	75	4.4%	13.0%	-21.7%	-9.4%	1.1%	-52.5%	-1.7%
oxnard-thousand oaks-ventura, ca	76	11.6%	46.3%	-24.5%	-40.3%	-2.3%	-55.4%	-3.2%
colorado springs, co	77	8.4%	25.0%	-13.6%	-3.1%	1.6%	-21.0%	-1.1%
madison, wi	78	4.9%	37.2%	-18.0%	-43.7%	-4.1%	-33.3%	-1.0%
bakersfield, ca	79	5.8%	36.6%	-26.6%	-24.8%	0.3%	-48.9%	-2.0%
winston-salem, nc	80	9.5%	10.3%	-23.8%	-34.6%	-1.3%	-36.8%	-0.9%
syracuse, ny	81	-2.0%	67.8%	-30.4%	-48.5%	-2.4%	-68.6%	-3.3%
deltona-daytona beach-ormond beach, fl	82	-2.7%	6.8%	-7.4%	-7.9%	0.0%	-39.8%	-2.6%
boise city, id	83	5.4%	43.3%	-1.9%	-26.4%	-3.4%	49.2%	4.0%
wichita, ks	84	5.1%	25.5%	-30.2%	-20.4%	1.3%	-16.0%	1.0%
toledo, oh	85	-4.8%	35.4%	-14.3%	18.3%	3.6%	30.3%	3.1%
des moines-west des moines, ia	86	-5.1%	1.6%	-3.6%	-13.6%	-0.9%	-4.1%	0.0%
springfield, ma	87	12.1%	71.8%	-28.2%	-46.8%	-3.2%	-53.8%	-2.4%
lakeland-winter haven, fl	88	2.3%	7.8%	-3.7%	-31.0%	-2.4%	-5.7%	0.0%
palm bay-melbourne-titusville, fl	89	2.1%	1.6%	-10.7%	-9.5%	0.1%	-18.6%	-0.7%
mcallen-edinburg-mission, tx	90	1.3%	6.1%	-12.2%	-34.5%	-1.6%	29.3%	1.4%
harrisburg-carlisle, pa	91	13.7%	59.1%	-41.9%	-50.9%	-1.4%	-85.5%	-5.4%
scranton--wilkes-barre--hazleton, pa	92	3.0%	57.1%	-27.3%	-73.1%	-4.7%	-91.1%	-4.6%
augusta-richmond county, ga-sc	93	4.8%	14.5%	-27.0%	-36.8%	-1.0%	-24.1%	0.3%
youngstown-warren-boardman, oh-pa	94	2.5%	26.4%	-27.5%	-28.9%	-0.1%	-61.7%	-3.6%
stockton-lodi, ca	95	2.6%	42.9%	-23.6%	-38.7%	-2.5%	-48.7%	-2.2%
durham-chapel hill, nc	96	-2.2%	16.0%	-14.2%	-29.3%	-1.9%	-37.1%	-1.8%
portland-south portland, me	97	9.2%	28.0%	-28.1%	-35.9%	-1.1%	-68.0%	-3.3%
spokane-spokane valley, wa	98	8.6%	46.9%	-21.1%	-28.7%	-1.5%	-44.8%	-1.7%
chattanooga, tn-ga	99	12.1%	25.5%	-26.0%	-25.9%	0.0%	-47.4%	-2.0%
jackson, ms	100	4.2%	23.2%	-21.9%	-27.4%	-0.5%	-21.6%	0.0%

*Editor's Note: Some data points for urban Honolulu and Toledo, Ohio have been excluded this week due to data unavailability.

About realtor.com^®Realtor.com^® makes buying, selling and living in homes easier and more rewarding for everyone. Realtor.com^® pioneered the world of digital real estate 20 years ago, and today through its website and mobile apps is a trusted source for the information, tools and professional expertise that help people move confidently through every step of their home journey. Using proprietary data science and machine learning technology, realtor.com^® pairs buyers and sellers with local agents in their market, helping take the guesswork out of buying and selling a home. For professionals, realtor.com^® is a trusted provider of consumer connections and branding solutions that help them succeed in today's on-demand world. Realtor.com^® is operated by News Corp [Nasdaq: NWS, NWSA] [ASX: NWS, NWSLV] subsidiary Move, Inc. under a perpetual license from the National Association of REALTORS^®. For more information, visit realtor.com^®.