Map Shows Where House Prices Are Rising and Falling Fastest
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Despite dwindling sales, home prices continue to climb in much of the country and especially in the Northeast, where New York reported the highest year-over-year gain in May at 7.4 percent, according to the latest S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller Index.
But even as prices continue inching up, they are doing so at a slower pace than ever since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The index found that all nine U.S. census divisions reported an overall annual price gain of 2.3 percent in May, down from 2.7 percent in April.
The 10-city composite index reported an annual increase of 3.4 percent, down from 4.1 percent a month earlier, while the 20-city composite posted a 2.8 percent year-over-year gain, down from 3.4 percent in April.
"May's data continued the years' slow unwind of price momentum, with annual gains narrowing for a fourth consecutive month," Nicholas Godec, Head of Fixed Income Tradables & Commodities at S&P Dow Jones Indices, said in a press release shared with Newsweek.
"Seasonal momentum is proving weaker than usual, and the slowdown is now more than just a story of higher mortgage rates. It reflects a market recalibrating around tighter financial conditions, subdued transaction volumes, and increasingly local dynamics. With affordability still stretched and inventory constrained, national home prices are holding steady, but barely."
Where Home Prices Are Rising—And Where They Are Falling
The Northeast and the Midwest, where the shortage of homes remains most acute, experienced the highest price growth in May, according to the index.
After New York, Chicago reported the second-biggest annual home price gain in May of all major U.S. metros analyzed by S&P and CoreLogic, up 6.1 percent. It was followed by Detroit with a year-over-year increase of 4.9 percent.
At the other end of the spectrum there's the South, where metros in states like Florida and Texas, which have gone through a significant construction boom over the past few years, are reporting annual price drops.
Tampa reported the steepest year-over-year price decline in May, at -2.42 percent. It was followed by Dallas and San Francisco both at -0.64 percent, and Denver at -0.01 percent.
What Does The Index Tell Us About The State Of The Housing Market
While prices are still rising at the national level, it is significant how much slower the pace of their growth has gotten in the past few months. This is happening mostly because the U.S. housing market has reached a breaking point in terms of affordability: even as demand remains high and millions of Americans dream of homeownership, many just cannot afford it at the moment.
The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage is still hovering near the 7 percent mark, and experts do not expect rates to get lower than 6 percent any time soon. Property taxes are much higher than they used to be five years ago, and home insurance premiums are rising as the threat of natural disasters grows with climate change.
Buyers' reluctance to engage in the market, which has been exacerbated by recent fears over the direction taken by the U.S. economy under the helm of President Donald Trump, has caused a pileup of unsold homes across the country—especially in areas where developers have built more new homes.
This shrinking of demand is likely to lead to a normalization of the U.S. market after years of overheating, experts say—but low inventory across the country has been keeping prices up so far.
Things may change as a result of a bipartisan housing package just moving through the legislature right now. Under the ROAD to Housing Act, lawmakers on both sides of the political spectrum are trying to boost the country's home supply and improve affordability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Taxpayers cannot risk automation without clear rules of the road
Across industries, artificial intelligence is fast becoming the chief topic of discussion, and now the government is catching up, including the IRS. For certified public accountants, AI is a powerful tool with great potential to enhance efficiency; however, its implementation requires a thoughtful approach. For taxpayers, AI presents many compelling use cases but raises unsettling questions about accuracy and privacy. Ultimately, overreliance on AI, particularly in areas requiring professional expertise and judgment, poses risks for both CPAs and the taxpayer. This emerging technology in the accounting field requires careful use, but there are still no clear rules of the road for CPAs. The substantial lack of guidelines has led to a surge of new companies emerging seemingly overnight in the tax space, driven by AI programs. These firms market their services as a fast and easy alternative for tax filing. AI-powered tax solutions offer convenience, but their use in corporate tax settings warrants caution. Often, businesses have complex tax filings, nuanced interpretations for certain credits and jurisdiction-specific requirements that go beyond what current AI tools can reliably handle. Accounting firms cannot rely on AI alone, rather AI is a supplemental tool and not a replacement for the real human judgment of CPAs. These startups are operating without the standards that professional CPAs must uphold. Pair this lack of industry consensus on accuracy and privacy with the lack of federal oversight, it's easy to anticipate a 'Wild West' scenario. These companies, and their unbeknownst clients, are letting AI software conduct important finance calculations and tax filings without asking the hard questions. How are these AI tools trained? What happens if they're wrong? How can we protect the taxpayer from scams? Because of serious consequences for taxpayers and tax professionals, Americans must have a framework for AI use in tax services. Taxpayers deserve transparency about the tools being used to calculate their finances and tax returns. We need to ensure accounting expertise is not undercut by unregulated, shady algorithms. The tax system is too important to be left to chance. Take the research and development tax credit for example. This credit can offer significant financial benefits to a wide range of businesses, including those in manufacturing, biotech and software development. While an array of companies can qualify, it requires a nuanced understanding of IRS rules, including detailed documentation and in-depth interviews with employees to determine which activities qualify. Accountants run into roadblocks when the records are not detailed, and interviews help solidify a filing, regardless of the level of documentation. Determining eligibility for the R&D tax credit is not simple. It is not a fill-in-the-blank form that an automated system can do easily. It requires professional judgment and industry expertise, which includes human interaction. If companies only use AI systems and forgo interviews, they put their clients at risk of costly audits and breaking the law. Another danger is the payment schemes of these companies, which take a percentage of the credits that their clients receive. While this appears to be a sensible method, it deserves a closer look. AI can be trained to err on the side of qualifying for a tax credit even if the R&D activity doesn't truly qualify. This puts clients at risk of audits, fines and being found responsible for breaking the law if the company's activities do not actually qualify for a credit per tax code. Tax fraud is a criminal offense, and often, a company's leadership, such as the CEO or CFO, can be held liable. We need to protect American businesses from these serious consequences and ensure AI use is smart and not excessively relied upon when making important decisions. As AI becomes more integrated into financial services, there must be no confusion between automation and accountability. AI can be a powerful tool, but it is not a substitute for professional judgment, ethical responsibility or compliance with the law. Businesses that place blind trust in AI systems to handle complex tax matters risk more than filing errors. AI must be used to support, not replace, skilled human oversight. When it comes to taxes, the stakes are too high to let an algorithm make the final call.
Business Wire
23 minutes ago
- Business Wire
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a Leading Securities Fraud Law Firm Encourages Lineage, Inc. (LINE) Investors To Inquire About Securities Fraud Class Action
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a leading national shareholder rights law firm, announces that a securities fraud class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Lineage, Inc. ('Lineage' or the 'Company') (NASDAQ: LINE) common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement used in connection with the Company's July 2024 initial public offering (the 'IPO'). Lineage investors have until September 30, 2025 to file a lead plaintiff motion. IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR LINEAGE, INC. (LINE) INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS What Happened? In July 2024, Lineage conducted its IPO, selling over 65 million shares of common stock at $78 per share. On November 6, 2024, Lineage released its third quarter 2024 financial results, revealing that it had suffered a $543 million net loss during the quarter. On this news, Lineage's stock price fell $5.22, or 7.4%, to close at $65.79 per share on November 6, 2024, thereby injuring investors. Then, on January 14, 2025, The Wall Street Journal reported that Lineage was laying off employees due to reduced customer demand only six months after its IPO. Then, on April 7, 2025, Lineage announced the dismissal of its auditor, KPMG LLP. On this news, Lineage's stock price fell $5.29, or 9.9%, over two consecutive trading days, to close at $48.41 per share on April 8, 2025. Then, on April 30, 2025, Lineage reported first quarter 2025 financial results, including that '[t]otal revenue decreased (2.7)%' to $1.29 billion for the quarter. The Company stated it 'experienced more normal seasonal trends in the first quarter after multiple years of elevated inventory levels.' On this news, Lineage's stock price fell $8.16, or 14.62%, to close at $47.65 per share on April 30, 2025, thereby injuring investors further. On June 3, 2025, the Company stated at an Investor Conference that there has been 'pretty much flat demand' for Lineage's products and services and that the Company was operating in a 'flattish environment' in terms of demand. The price of Lineage stock has remained substantially below the IPO price at the time of this complaint's filing. What Is The Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that the Registration Statement made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that Lineage was then experiencing sustained weakening in customer demand, as additional cold-storage supply had come on line, the Company's customers destocked a glut of excessive inventory built up during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the Company's customers shifted to maintaining leaner cold-storage inventories on a go-forward basis in response to changed consumer trends; (2) that Lineage had implemented price increases in the lead-up to the IPO that could not be sustained in light of the weakening demand environment facing the Company; (3) that Lineage was unable to effectively counteract the adverse trends listed in the foregoing through the use of minimum storage guarantees or as a result of operational efficiencies, technological improvements, or its purported competitive advantages; (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, rather than enjoying stable revenue growth, high occupancy rates, and steady rent escalation as represented in the Registration Statement, Lineage was in fact suffering from stagnant or falling revenue, occupancy rates, and rent prices; and (5) as a result, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Lineage common pursuant and/or traceable to the IPO, you may move the Court no later than September 30, 2025 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. Contact Us To Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq., Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150, Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Business Insider
25 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Stocks just broke through a key level that indicates a sell-off. Here's how much the S&P 500 will fall before you should buy, according to one strategist
The stock market flashed a key technical signal that suggests a pullback from all-time highs is on the way. That's according to Jonathan Krinsky, the managing director and chief market technician at BTIG, who thinks the S&P 500 is bound for a 5% pullback soon. The benchmark index just broke through a technical resistance level that suggests a retrenchment is likely, he said, speculating the index could fall to around 6,100 before investors have the opportunity to buy. The S&P 500 saw technical resistance, a price ceiling where sellers are likely to step in and cause a pullback, at around the 6,100 mark in late January, Krinsky said. That was several months before Trump announced his tariffs and drove a steep decline in equities. The index then dropped around 20% from its February peak through the sell-off in early April, before breaking past the key 6,100 level again in late June. "Typically, when you break through resistance, you do get a check back to kind of retest that support. And so we do think that's coming, into this August, September period," Krinsky said, speaking to CNBC this week. "We think you'll get an opportunity to buy around 6,100." There are a few signs that suggest that the stock market is looking vulnerable to a correction, Krinsky added. Here are some of the warning signs he sees: 1. Consumer-focused stocks look weak. Krinsky pointed to potential vulnerabilities in consumer-facing sectors, like retail and transportation. The consumer discretionary sector of the S&P 500, for instance, has been among the worst-performing areas of the market so far this year. Consumer discretionary stocks in the S&P 500 are down 0.43% since January, one of the only areas of the broader index in the red this year. Other market pros have said they're eyeing weakness in consumer stocks, pointing to the impact of tariffs on inflation and consumer spending. "You're seeing some cracks under the surface," Krinsky said. 2. Semiconductors could start to underperform Historically, semiconductor stocks have lagged behind software stocks in the late summer, Krinsky said, adding that he believed many names in the semiconductor space also looked vulnerable to him. Some chipmakers' second-quarter earnings have been weaker than expected. Advanced Micro Devices missed slightly on earnings estimates for the quarter, while Super Micro Computer missed slightly on earnings and revenue. "August tends to favor software over semis," Krinsky said, though he noted that Nvidia's earnings report, which is coming up at the end of the month, will remain a key influence over the sector's performance. 3. Credit spreads could widen Credit spreads, which are the difference between the yield demanded by investors to hold corporate bonds versus safer debt like US Treasurys, have remained tight this year. For markets, that's a good sign, as wider credit spreads mean investors think there's a higher risk to holding corporate debt over government bonds, and are demanding a higher yield. The ICE Bank of America US High Yield Index Option-Adjusted Spread hovered near 2.95% in the last week, near a historic low. But credit spreads could start to widen, which could be negative for equities, Krinsky said. He pointed to weak manufacturing employment data, which tends to be associated with wider credit spreads. "If we think that credit spreads are about as tight as they can get, they probably have a little bit of room to move wider. That also suggests some risk in the cyclical versus defensive trade," he added. 4. Investors could start to sell mega-cap tech stocks Microsoft and Meta, two of the largest tech titans in the AI trade, reported "blowout" earnings for the second quarter, Krinsky said. But besides both stocks surging after reporting their results, investors haven't been buying more shares, he added. "We haven't seen buying enthusiasm post the print," Krinsky said. "That's the risk. We kind of got as good as it gets from some of those mega-cap earnings, and we just see a little bit of profit taking into the back half of the summer."
