Millennials Buck Generational Housing Market Trend
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Millennials are the only generation in the United States to have shown an increase in interest in buying a home within the next six months compared to September, according to a new survey from Realtor.com.
Why It Matters
The increase in millennial homebuying intent signals a notable divergence from broader generational trends, suggesting shifting priorities or economic pressures in the largest cohort of American adults.
Persistently high mortgage rates and tight housing supply have made homeownership more challenging nationwide. Yet, millennials are demonstrating renewed determination to enter the housing market, even as high borrowing costs stall other groups.
Analysts suggest that these shifts may impact broader market conditions, including inventory levels, affordability, and pricing strategies, throughout 2025.
What To Know
The survey, conducted between April 10 and 11, sampled 2,203 U.S. adults and found that only the millennial generation reported an increased likelihood of purchasing a home in the next six months.
The proportion of millennial respondents planning to purchase a home within the next six months increased to 23 percent, up from 15 percent in September 2024. In comparison, overall intent among other generations—and among Americans at large—remained flat or declined.
High mortgage rates continue to weigh heavily on Americans' homebuying plans.
A majority of Americans, 69 percent, do not plan to engage in a real estate transaction within the next six months.
"Despite current market challenges and persistently high mortgage rates, Millennials are showing a notable increase in home buying interest this spring compared to last fall," said Laura Eddy, vice president of research and insights at Realtor.com in the report.
"Even though we found a change in Millennial homebuying intent, the influence of mortgage rates cannot be overstated, with the vast majority of Americans, including Millennials, prioritizing lower rates before committing to a purchase. The lock-in effect is still very much in effect "
A "House For Sale" sign is displayed in front of a home in Los Angeles on August 30, 2023.
A "House For Sale" sign is displayed in front of a home in Los Angeles on August 30, 2023.One-third of all respondents reported that they have delayed purchasing a home due to high mortgage rates, a finding similar to that in September.
Gen Z was the most cautious of high mortgage rates, preferring to sign a lease rather than take on home ownership.
Meanwhile, 41 percent of baby boomers said that mortgage rates do not impact their decision to buy a home.
Millennials currently make up 29 percent of homebuyers, the largest portion across all generations. The typical age of a first-time homebuyer was 38 years old in 2024, according to the National Association of Realtors.
"While many older households already own their home, and younger households are happy to, or can only afford to, rent, many millennial households are looking to get on the property ladder to start building wealth via homeownership, meaning this generation is a significant share of buyers," Hannah Jones, senior research analyst at Realtor.com told Newsweek.
In a separate Realtor survey, 78 percent of potential sellers believed interest rates would either remain the same or increase over the next 12 months. For those who think rates are going to increase, 43 percent said this would increase the likelihood of them selling.
What People Are Saying
Hannah Jones, senior research analyst at Realtor.com, said in the report: "Across much of our research we see a trend where potential homebuyers feel stuck when it comes to buying a home due to their current mortgage rate.
"Mortgage rates on top of an insufficient supply of budget-friendly homes complicates the affordability picture for many homeowners, especially first time homebuyers who do not have equity from their existing home to help offset mortgage rates. However, we expect that this lock in effect will ease as more homeowners grow tired of waiting for significant rate changes and as life factors such as jobs, kids and retirements drive more to make a home purchase."
Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "Millennials are finally at a stage in life where homeownership feels possible. After years of renting and juggling student debt, many now have stable careers and the financial footing to make a move."
Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "As a generational group, millennials have suffered the largest blow for the rising prices and mortgage rates of houses in recent years. Many in this generation are entering better jobs with higher pay, and if they haven't taken the dip into home ownership yet, they're more than likely ready to want to dive in now."
What Happens Next
While some buyers are waiting for interest rates to decrease, experts have warned that rates are unlikely to return to pre-pandemic levels. However, there may be modest decreases that fluctuate with the economy.
However, a shift in millennial homebuying could impact prices across housing markets, experts say.
"Some millennials have built up enough capital for higher down payments and are ready to settle in," Thompson said. "This wave of demand could put upward pressure on pricing, but if affordability remains a challenge, it may also place a floor under housing prices."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
34 minutes ago
- Forbes
Immigration Research Shows Stephen Miller Wrong About American Science
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller attends a press briefing at the White House on ... More February 20, 2025. Miller, the chief architect of the Trump administration's immigration policy, argues that American scientific achievement owes little to immigrants. A significant body of research disputes that contention. (Photo by) Stephen Miller, the chief architect of the Trump administration's immigration policy, said recently that American scientific achievement owes little to immigrants. A significant body of research disputes that contention. Miller's argument and a statement by Vice President JD Vance about the Apollo Program seem designed to justify the administration's restrictions on international students and high-skilled immigrants. On May 31, 2025, in a statement on White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller wrote, 'During the middle of the 20th century—when the U.S. achieved unquestioned global scientific dominance—there was net zero migration. From the 20's to the 70's the foreign-born population was cut almost by half while the overall population doubled. (Until Hart-Celler kicked in).' Contrary to the implication of Miller's statement, American science owes a great deal to immigrants in the post-war period. Between 1945 and 1974, 16 of the 30 U.S. winners of the Nobel Prize in physics were immigrants, according to a National Foundation for American Policy analysis. In 1954, the Atomic Energy Act established an award recognizing scientific achievements in atomic energy. Italian-born Enrico Fermi won the first award. Five of the first eight winners of what became the Enrico Fermi Award (named after his death) were immigrants. Four of the nuclear scientists who came to the United States from Europe in the 1930s later received a Nobel Prize for physics: Felix Bloch, born in Switzerland, won it in 1952, Emilio Segre (Italy) in 1959, and Maria Mayer (Poland) and Eugene Wigner (Hungary) won the award in 1963. Despite the immigration restrictions imposed by Congress in 1921 and 1924, U.S. universities and others found ways around some of the quotas as fascist governments drove many brilliant individuals out of Europe. Immigrants Albert Einstein and Leo Szilard signed a letter used by Russian-born economist Alexander Sachs to convince President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to start the Manhattan Project. Breakthroughs by Niels Bohr, born in Denmark, and Enrico Fermi were crucial in developing the atomic bomb. In the end, immigrant and U.S.-born scientists working together turned theory into reality in the race to build the bomb before Nazi Germany. Between 1945 and 1974, 15 of the 36 U.S. Nobel Prizes in medicine, or 42%, were awarded to immigrants. That tells only part of the story. Albert Sabin, an immigrant from Poland, and Jonas Salk, the son of an immigrant, developed the vaccines that ended polio as a threat to Americans. Both men were in America due to family immigration. 'Without Sabin and Salk, American children would continue to be paralyzed for life by polio,' Michel Zaffran, director of polio eradication at the World Health Organization, said in an interview. 'Their contribution is quite simply immeasurable.' Immigrants have been awarded 40% of the Nobel Prizes won by Americans in chemistry, medicine and physics since 2000, according to an NFAP analysis (updated through the 2024 awards). Enrico Fermi in His Laboratory (Photo by © CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images) The 1924 Immigration Act, which reduced the flow of immigrants by approximately 90% and blocked Jews, Eastern Europeans and Asians, proved disastrous economically for America. According to research by New York University economists Petra Moser and Shmuel San, the restrictive immigration quotas of the 1920s significantly reduced invention in the United States. 'After the quotas, U.S. scientists produced 68% fewer additional patents in the pre-quota fields of ESE-born [Eastern and Southern European immigrant] scientists compared with the pre-quota fields of other U.S. scientists,' write Moser and San. 'Time-varying effects show a large decline in invention by U.S. scientists in the 1930s, which persisted into the 1960s.' Moser and San said the results show that U.S. scientists benefited from the presence of immigrant scientists but suffered after U.S. immigration restrictions blocked their entry. 'A firm-level analysis of changes in patenting reveals that firms which employed ESE-born [Eastern and Southern European immigrant] scientists in 1921 created 53% fewer inventions after the quotas,' according to Moster and San. 'A text analysis of U.S. patents indicates that invention also declined more broadly. After the quotas, 23% fewer U.S. patents describe inventions in ESE [Eastern and Southern European immigrant] fields compared with other fields.' UPENN Wharton economics professor Zeke Hernandez said one would expect similar consequences today should U.S. immigration policy block the entry of international students and foreign-born scientists and engineers. 'America's innovation machine would be decimated,' said Hernandez. 'Sixteen percent of inventors in the U.S. are foreign-born, but they account for 36% of all patents.' He points out immigrants are 80% more likely than the U.S.-born to start new businesses, and they are founders of over half of startups that achieve a $1 billion valuation. Over 70% of the full-time graduate students in key technical fields at U.S. universities are foreign-born. According to economist Zeke Hernandez, 'You don't have to have compassion for foreigners to know that getting rid of immigrants is bad for us.'
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Should We Be Cautious About CarMax, Inc.'s (NYSE:KMX) ROE Of 8.0%?
One of the best investments we can make is in our own knowledge and skill set. With that in mind, this article will work through how we can use Return On Equity (ROE) to better understand a business. By way of learning-by-doing, we'll look at ROE to gain a better understanding of CarMax, Inc. (NYSE:KMX). Return on Equity or ROE is a test of how effectively a company is growing its value and managing investors' money. Simply put, it is used to assess the profitability of a company in relation to its equity capital. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. Return on equity can be calculated by using the formula: Return on Equity = Net Profit (from continuing operations) ÷ Shareholders' Equity So, based on the above formula, the ROE for CarMax is: 8.0% = US$501m ÷ US$6.2b (Based on the trailing twelve months to February 2025). The 'return' is the yearly profit. So, this means that for every $1 of its shareholder's investments, the company generates a profit of $0.08. See our latest analysis for CarMax By comparing a company's ROE with its industry average, we can get a quick measure of how good it is. However, this method is only useful as a rough check, because companies do differ quite a bit within the same industry classification. If you look at the image below, you can see CarMax has a lower ROE than the average (18%) in the Specialty Retail industry classification. Unfortunately, that's sub-optimal. Although, we think that a lower ROE could still mean that a company has the opportunity to better its returns with the use of leverage, provided its existing debt levels are low. A company with high debt levels and low ROE is a combination we like to avoid given the risk involved. Virtually all companies need money to invest in the business, to grow profits. The cash for investment can come from prior year profits (retained earnings), issuing new shares, or borrowing. In the case of the first and second options, the ROE will reflect this use of cash, for growth. In the latter case, the debt used for growth will improve returns, but won't affect the total equity. That will make the ROE look better than if no debt was used. It's worth noting the high use of debt by CarMax, leading to its debt to equity ratio of 2.91. The combination of a rather low ROE and significant use of debt is not particularly appealing. Debt does bring extra risk, so it's only really worthwhile when a company generates some decent returns from it. Return on equity is a useful indicator of the ability of a business to generate profits and return them to shareholders. A company that can achieve a high return on equity without debt could be considered a high quality business. All else being equal, a higher ROE is better. But ROE is just one piece of a bigger puzzle, since high quality businesses often trade on high multiples of earnings. The rate at which profits are likely to grow, relative to the expectations of profit growth reflected in the current price, must be considered, too. So you might want to check this FREE visualization of analyst forecasts for the company. If you would prefer check out another company -- one with potentially superior financials -- then do not miss this free list of interesting companies, that have HIGH return on equity and low debt. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Business Upturn
44 minutes ago
- Business Upturn
From Startup to State Asset? Former Hedge Fund Manager Warns Elon Musk's Dojo Is Quietly Becoming National Infrastructure
BALTIMORE, June 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — It started as a Tesla project. But according to former hedge fund manager Enrique Abeyta's recent briefing, Elon Musk's Dojo may soon be functioning as critical U.S. infrastructure — without anyone officially calling it that. What began as an AI chip built to replace Nvidia has quickly evolved into a full-stack platform capable of running autonomous vehicles, training machine vision systems, and powering physical AI across industries. 'This is how it happens,' Abeyta says. 'You build something private… and then one day, the government needs it more than anyone else.' The Private Chip That's Becoming Public Policy Dojo was born out of necessity — after Nvidia couldn't meet Musk's needs. The result? A custom chip now reported to be 6x more powerful than Nvidia's best-selling model, optimized for training AI on real-world video at massive scale. Every day, Tesla's fleet feeds Dojo with 160 billion frames of visual data, helping the system learn how to operate in the physical world — without human help. On June 1st, Tesla is expected to launch a robotaxi with no steering wheel, no pedals, and no fallback to human control. AI Without a Kill Switch Dojo's value isn't just speed — it's autonomy. Abeyta believes that's what makes it so appealing to government agencies quietly searching for domestic alternatives to foreign tech dependence. 'Once you control the AI, the chips, the vehicles, and the data — you're not a car company anymore,' he says. 'You're a national asset in everything but name.' And the signs are already here: According to internal reports, one of Musk's key Dojo partners is 'expecting to receive billions of dollars from the Trump administration. ' That aligns with a recent executive order from President Trump, aimed at 'removing barriers to American AI innovation.' The Tesla Effect: When Platforms Become Policy This wouldn't be the first time Musk built something the government eventually leaned on — from satellites to EV infrastructure. But Abeyta says Dojo is different . It's not about energy or communication. It's about machine-level control over physical environments — and that means its future may not be up to Tesla at all. About Enrique Abeyta Enrique Abeyta is a former hedge fund manager with more than two decades of experience tracking large-scale industrial and capital transformations. After managing nearly $4 billion in institutional funds, he now leads Breaking Profits, a research platform focused on identifying the hidden infrastructure reshaping America's future — from finance to tech to defense. Media Contact:Derek WarrenPublic Relations ManagerParadigm Press Group Email: [email protected]
