Buying a home in San Diego will set you back.

This is not exactly breaking news. But it’s useful to quantify exactly how expensive San Diego housing is, and how this has changed over the years.

A good way to measure housing expensiveness is to compare home prices with the two main factors that typically drive them: local rents and incomes.

• Rents tell us how much it costs to put a roof over one’s head without buying a home. (They also measure how much rental income can be expected by real estate investors.)

• Incomes tell us how much San Diegans earn, which correlates to how much they are able to spend on housing.

Between them, these two numbers capture most of the important elements that influence home prices, including population, housing supply and economic conditions. They can, therefore, give us a ballpark idea of how much it should cost to buy a San Diego home.

We Stand Up for You. Will You Stand Up for Us?

The chart below illustrates this idea by showing the ratio of San Diego home prices to a combination of local rents and incomes. (This type of ratio, in which prices are compared to some underlying economic factor, is known as a “valuation.”)


This graph reveals a critically important pattern: While San Diego housing valuations have had some pretty wild ups and downs, they’ve tended strongly to be drawn back toward a historically typical, middle-of-the-road level. This makes sense — home prices should have a tight relationship with how much people earn and how much they are paying for rent. If prices get too far out of whack from rents and incomes, it’s a good indicator that something else is afoot.

The mid-2000s housing bubble clearly visible on the graph provides a dramatic example. Back in the bubble days, a lot of platitudes were making the rounds as housing bulls tried to rationalize soaring real estate prices. But a quick look at the valuation ratio revealed them to be off base. “Everyone wants to live here” and “they’re not making any more land,” in addition to being longstanding features of life in San Diego, didn’t explain why home prices should leave rents — also subject to the laws of supply and demand — in the dust. High-fiving about the booming economy didn’t justify the fact that home prices were rising in vast excess to local incomes.

Valuations were also a useful guide in the ensuing crash. After a brutal multiyear home price decline, it seemed pretty common to believe that there was no end in sight. But eventually, the valuation ratio showed that San Diego home prices — while still high compared with most other cities, and maybe to what some people would like them to be — were back to pretty typical levels compared with rents and incomes (and, for a while, even below them).

Since hitting bottom in early 2012, valuations have been on the rise again. While nowhere near peak-bubble levels, homes are now more expensive than they’ve ever been outside the bubble years.

There is an interesting wrinkle this time around: Despite unusually high purchase prices, all-time low mortgage rates are keeping monthly costs quite reasonable for borrowers. Compared to rents and incomes, the monthly payment on the median San Diego home is actually lower than the historic norm.

These super-low rates are surely helping keep home valuations aloft, but we should be careful not to put too much weight on the monthly payment factor.  Several other elements come into play when buyers decide how much to pay for housing, including anticipated changes in prices and interest rates, expectations for future rent growth and non-mortgage costs such as down payments and property taxes.

All these factors together have resulted in a strong tendency for valuations to gravitate back toward that middle-of-the-road level. The fact that this tendency has endured across the 40 years shown in the chart, even though interest rates have varied enormously over that time, is pretty compelling.

But “compelling” is not the same as “a sure thing.” It’s possible that low rates (should they persist) or housing supply constraints could support higher-than-typical expensiveness indefinitely.  Only time will tell whether valuations remain aloft or return, as they have in the past, toward more historically normal levels.

In the meantime, potential buyers and sellers should bear in mind that San Diego homes — while nowhere near the nutty heights reached during the bubble — are more expensive than they’ve been through most of the past four decades.

    This article relates to: Housing, News

    Written by Rich Toscano

    Rich Toscano has been observing the housing market for Voice of San Diego, with the occasional prolonged absence, since 2006. Follow him on Twitter at @richtoscano or read more about San Diego housing at his blog, Piggington's Econo-Almanac.

    Bryan S
    Bryan S

    Thank you for the excellent article, Rich. Is it reasonable that the valuation index returns to the historical mean by rents and incomes rising, instead of home prices coming down? Did that trend ever occur in the past 'corrections'? Thanks for the insights!

    Rich Toscano
    Rich Toscano author

    @Bryan S Yes, that is very reasonable, and it has happened before in the early 1980s.

    bryan munson
    bryan munson

    I've been following your site for many years, and I find it incredibly useful.  But I have a few questions that might clarify things for me.

    1) In the San Diego Home Valuation Index, why are rent and income equally weighted?  Why are they even lumped together?  Does making 2 separate valuations show anything different or valuable?

    2) Do you have a chart showing the San Diego Home Valuation Index, but using monthly mortgage payment, vice home prices?  It would be interesting to see how closely the SDHVI tracks with monthly mortgage payment?  If low rates are here to stay (like most economists tell us - I can't/won't support or refute their claims) then we should expect a new normal well above the historical mean.

    Thank you for providing such a valuable service

    Rich Toscano
    Rich Toscano author

    @bryan munson Sorry for the delay but I didn't see this until just now!  Thanks for the comments.

    1. They are lumped together, and equally weighted, just as a way to capture all the info in a single indicator. I used to separate them out, but price-to-income and price-to-rent ratios end up looking so similar that I didn't see much value in keeping them separate. If you are curious to see what they look like separately, I just put that up here:

    2. Just put up a new VOSD article on that topic here:

    mike johnson
    mike johnson subscriber

    Should also use the national median price for a home for the past 100 years adjusted for inflation. The charts displayed price between 80 to 120% except it went up to 200% in 2005. That why I was telling people in 2009 a 40% drop. I was close. Currently its back up to 140-150%. So we are still overvalued by 20 to 25%. 

    Grew up in San Diego in the 50's to parent born here. Always heard home prices never fall in San Diego. People do not remember early 1990s or early 60's. But some guy did his thesis on San Diego home prices since 1900. Prices dropped 30% during the depression.

    Good luck all of north county over one million along the coastal cities when interest rates go back to 6-7%. Can the upper middle class afford  one million dollar loan at 6%-$6000 per month or 7%-6,650 per month. We shall see in the next few years.

    Mike Meyer--South Mission beach

    vintagevoice subscriber

    Rich, Is there a technical reason you use a historical mean for the entire time period instead of some kind of rolling average or "best line fit"  that might show a trend? To my eyes a line of best fit would show some upward trend, even if you capped the bubble somewhat.

    Rich Toscano
    Rich Toscano author

    @vintagevoice Good question and one I've thought about too. It's plausible that there might be an uptrend to this series over the long haul. But, a trend line would be seriously distorted by the massive bubble spike in valuations. And I don't think a moving average is much help, because all that would matter is whether the average included the bubble period or not. So I ended up just using the median to give a visual on what's been the typical, middle of the road valuation over time.  I tried to address the possibility of a trend higher in the article text, but this is a topic I'll look at more closely in the future.

    Jeffrey Davis
    Jeffrey Davis subscribermember

    I don't understand the hand-waiving away of the relevance of interest rates. "The monthly payment on the median San Diego home is actually lower than the historic norm." But... what? You cite some reasons to dismiss it, granted, but they look pretty thin. Prices respond to the cost of money.