Home > Mortgages > The U.S. Cities That Are About to Become Unaffordable

Comments 0 Comments

When you hear affordable cities, there are four that should be familiar to you now: Cincinnati, Charlotte, Pittsburgh, Omaha.

But here’s a list of U.S. cities that are rapidly becoming less affordable: Cincinnati, Charlotte, Pittsburgh, Omaha.

In other words, the secret is out. The good news is, many of these places are still affordable — for now. The bad news is that time might be running out.

Data crunchers at RealtyTrac have supplied Credit.com with information on housing affordability for a couple of years now. People exhausted by the rat race in high-cost places like New York and San Francisco are moving to middle-of-the-county havens like Kansas City, where wages and housing prices are more in sync, as we’ve explored in our True Cost of Living series. It turns out that combination of strong employment and reasonable housing costs make places like Pittsburgh both attractive and financially sensible.

As much as we’d like to claim no one else has made this discovery, plenty of folks are onto the idea. We noticed last year that rental prices in places like Pittsburgh (not to mention Portland) are spiking. Now RealtyTrac data shows that affordability is fast moving in the opposite direction in many of these now-popular places.

RealtyTrac developed its own affordability index, which takes into account factors like median wages, median home prices and property taxes. This data shows that Boone County, Kentucky — near Cincinnati — is 47% less affordable this year than last year, making it the U.S. county with the fastest trajectory toward unaffordability. That’s right. Boone County — not Manhattan.

“The trend is toward less affordability, and with interest rates so low there is really no other policy lever that can be pulled to make homes more affordable. At this point either home prices need to flat line or drop, or wages need to jump, to change the trajectory toward less affordable,” Daren Blomquist, vice president of RealtyTrac, said.

Here are a few other places you might not expect to see crack the “top 25” list for areas racing toward being unaffordable, and how much less affordable they are this year compared to last.

  • Peoria, Ill. — Tazewell County (31%)
  • Richmond, Va. — Henrico County (29%)
  • Omaha, Neb. — Douglas County (29%)
  • St. Louis, Mo. — St. Louis City County (22%)
  • Charlotte, N.C. — Rowan County (20%)
  • Pittsburgh, Pa. — Washington County (19%)
  • Minneapolis, Minn. — Ramsey County (16%)
  • Toledo, Ohio (16%)
  • Des Moines, Iowa (14%)

“There are certainly some on this list that might be thought of as affordable compared to other markets, but compared to their own historical standard of affordability they are becoming less affordable,” Blomquist said.

How Long Before These Areas Become Unaffordable?

The news isn’t all bad. Many of these cities will still sound affordable to outsiders. In Polk County, Iowa (Des Moines), the median home sale price in the first quarter this year was $145,000, and that only eats up 22% of median wages. That’s good. On the other hand, median home sale prices were up 8% in the past year, while wages went up only 3%. So how long will Des Moines remain affordable for homeowners? That’s hard to say.

That same mathematics is repeating itself around the country. In Virginia’s Henrico Country (Richmond), prices rose 27%. In Douglas County, Nebraska (Omaha), they are up 38%. In Hamilton County, Ohio (Cincinnati), they’re up 33%.

There are other places to find better news, if you know where to look. In some cities, adjoining counties are becoming more affordable while their neighbors are feeling the squeeze. Pittsburgh-area Butler County is 14% more affordable, the data suggests, thanks to housing prices and mortgage interest rates taking a dip. That’s also true in Union County, N.C., near Charlotte, where things are 14% more affordable. But even here, the data is tricky to understand. Historically, residents in Union County needed to spend 40% of their wages to buy a home, and now that’s dipped to 33% — still a high number.

Overall, more American markets are trending toward unaffordability, RealtyTrac finds. Nationwide, in the first quarter of 2016, the average wage earner needed to spend 30.2% of their monthly wages to make mortgage payments on a median-priced home ($199,000), up from 26.4% of average wages last year. And median home price growth outpaced wage growth in more than 60% of counties.

The share of counties not affordable by their own historic standards jumped from 2% of all counties a year ago to 9% of all counties in the first quarter of 2016. Compare that to 2007-2008, when more than 80% of markets were less affordable than historic norms.

“While the vast majority of housing markets are still affordable by their own historic standards, home prices are floating out of reach for average wage earners in a growing number of U.S. housing markets,” Blomquist said. “The recent drop in interest rates has helped to soften the blow of high-flying price appreciation in some markets, but the affordability equation could change quickly if interest rates trend higher and home prices continue to rise faster than wages.”

If you’re considering buying a home, whether in one of the these locations or somewhere else, it’s important to check your credit score first. Doing so can help you have a better understanding of what rates and mortgage plans you may qualify for as well as how much house you can afford. (You can check your two free credit scores, updated each month, on Credit.com.)

More Money-Saving Reads:

Image: iStock

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team