Skip to content

Did the Housing Market Fundamentally Change?


Tuesday, November 19, 2019
Miniature House on A Blue Financial Graph

Housing markets were especially hot leading up to the Great Recession. According to a recent Economic Synopses essay, some housing markets might be hotter now than they were then.

Vice President and Economist Carlos Garriga, Visiting Scholar Aaron Hedlund and Research Associate Matthew Famiglietti examined housing markets across the U.S. via changes in house prices and in average time on the market (or housing liquidity, as the authors referred to it).

“Since the housing crisis of 2007-11, housing prices and liquidity have largely recovered or exceeded their pre-crisis levels, with some areas running hotter now than during the 2002-06 boom,” they wrote.

The authors compared housing conditions in 2002-06 and 2013-17. Heat maps in the essay show the differences in house prices changes and time on the market changes between the two periods.

House Prices

The authors noted that the 2002-06 housing boom seemed to be concentrated on the East and West coasts. “Housing prices in metropolitan areas of Florida, the Northeast, the Pacific Northwest, and the Southwest increased dramatically,” Garriga, Hedlund and Famiglietti wrote.

At the same time, the Midwest and other central areas saw more modest increases or even decreases. In the current boom, however, the Midwest has seen large increases in prices, and Texas and Northern California have become hot spots.

“The post-crisis period is also characterized by significantly cooler housing markets in the Northeast and parts of the Sunbelt such as Arizona,” the authors noted.

Housing Liquidity

Housing liquidity varied considerably in markets across the country during the 2002-06 boom, the authors found. Some metropolitan areas saw liquidity rise, others saw it fall, and still others saw a mix across counties within the same metro area.

“However, the post-crisis period of 2013-17 saw housing liquidity improve nearly everywhere,” Garriga, Hedlund and Famiglietti wrote, adding that there were some notable exceptions, such as spots in Arizona and California.

Why the Increase in Housing Liquidity?

The authors offered two possible explanations for the rise in housing liquidity.

A Return to Normal

One explanation is that housing markets became more illiquid during the crisis and are simply returning to normal. During the pre-crisis boom, average time on the market remained stable at around 131 days, the authors noted. By 2013, that number had risen to 157 days, but it had fallen to 129 days by 2017.

“This supports the view that the post-crisis period began with a more illiquid market and that the recent boom has restored the pre-crisis liquidity,” they wrote.

Fundamental Changes to the Housing Market

Garriga, Hedlund and Famiglietti also posited that the crisis or other factors—such as institutional investors buying across housing markets—may have fundamentally changed the housing market.

“However, the most current microlevel transaction data have not yet become available, limiting the scope of the analysis to evaluating whether the downward trend in housing liquidity has continued or plateaued,” they noted.

Additional Resources

Posted In Housing  |  Tagged carlos garrigaaaron hedlundmatthew famigliettihousinghouse priceshouse time on markethousing crisisfinancial crisis
Commenting Policy: We encourage comments and discussions on our posts, even those that disagree with conclusions, if they are done in a respectful and courteous manner. All comments posted to our blog go through a moderator, so they won't appear immediately after being submitted. We reserve the right to remove or not publish inappropriate comments. This includes, but is not limited to, comments that are:
  • Vulgar, obscene, profane or otherwise disrespectful or discourteous
  • For commercial use, including spam
  • Threatening, harassing or constituting personal attacks
  • Violating copyright or otherwise infringing on third-party rights
  • Off-topic or significantly political
The St. Louis Fed will only respond to comments if we are clarifying a point. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters, so please edit your thinking before posting. While you will retain all of your ownership rights in any comment you submit, posting comments means you grant the St. Louis Fed the royalty-free right, in perpetuity, to use, reproduce, distribute, alter and/or display them, and the St. Louis Fed will be free to use any ideas, concepts, artwork, inventions, developments, suggestions or techniques embodied in your comments for any purpose whatsoever, with or without attribution, and without compensation to you. You will also waive all moral rights you may have in any comment you submit.
comments powered by Disqus

The St. Louis Fed uses Disqus software for the comment functionality on this blog. You can read the Disqus privacy policy. Disqus uses cookies and third party cookies. To learn more about these cookies and how to disable them, please see this article.