Realtor.com® Metro Report Cards: Des Moines Earns Top Marks as Homebuilding and Affordability Divide America's Largest Metros

Realtor.com’s new 100-metro scorecard highlights where affordability and homebuilding align, with Des Moines leading and Los Angeles trailing.

Rhea-AI Summary

News Corp (NWS), via Realtor.com, released its first Metro Affordability & Homebuilding Report Cards, grading the 100 largest U.S. metros on current home affordability and future supply potential.

Ten metros earned A-range grades by combining relatively affordable prices with strong homebuilding. Des Moines ranked No. 1 with an A+ and total score of 83.4, driven by an affordability score of 88.3, a homebuilding score of 78.4, and a permit-to-population ratio 85% above the national average. Raleigh placed second with an A+ and a permit-to-population ratio of 2.51, while eight other metros, including Columbia, Houston, Indianapolis and Austin, also scored in the A range.

Thirteen metros received F grades. Los Angeles ranked last with a total score of 12.0, a median listing price of $1,129,415, an affordability score of 0.9, and a permit-to-population ratio less than half the national average.

News Explained

The release adds a 2025-based, equally weighted affordability-and-building framework, not a new corporate financing or ownership event.

The completed disclosure establishes a primarily 2025-based scoring framework for 100 metros, making its immediate consequence a comparable housing-market benchmark rather than a reported change in News Corp’s operating or ownership structure.

Each metro’s score gives equal weight to affordability and homebuilding: affordability combines mortgage burden with the share of listings affordable at different incomes, while homebuilding combines permits per population and the new-construction price premium.

The framework makes Los Angeles’ bottom ranking more concrete: its typical mortgage payment would require 84.4% of median income under the stated assumptions, and a buyer would need roughly 68% down, or about $768,000, to reach the 30% threshold.

Because the inputs are primarily 2025 listing, income, permit and population data, the report is a period-specific benchmark; later assessments would turn on updated versions of those line items.

AI-generated analysis. How Rhea-AI works. Not financial advice.

See more from StockTitan in Google Search and AI answers. Adds StockTitan as a preferred source · opens Google

Add on Google Not now

Ten metros earn A-range grades for balancing today's affordability with future supply; Los Angeles ranks last as the nation's least affordable major metro

AUSTIN, Texas, Sept. 16, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Realtor.com^® today released its first Metro Affordability & Homebuilding Report Cards, grading the nation's 100 largest metropolitan areas on the two factors most critical to homebuyers: whether homes are affordable for local earners today and whether enough new homes are being built to meet future demand.

Ten metros earned grades in the A range by pairing strong affordability with healthy homebuilding activity. Des Moines, Iowa, ranked first with an A+ and a score of 83.4, followed by Raleigh, N.C., also with an A+ and a score of 82.8, and Columbia, S.C., with an A and a score of 75.3. At the other end of the rankings, 13 metros received F grades, with New York ranking No. 98, Providence, R.I, ranking No. 99, and Los Angeles ranking last at No. 100.

The report comes as the United States faces a housing supply gap of more than 4 million homes. That shortage has made it harder for households to form, delayed the path to homeownership and constrained a key avenue for long-term wealth building. The new metro-level analysis shows where local housing markets are creating better conditions for buyers—and where persistent supply constraints remain most acute.

"Homebuilding and affordability are inseparable, and if we want to improve affordability in a lasting way, we need to build more homes," said Danielle Hale, chief economist, Realtor.com^®. "The metros at the top of these rankings show that buyers benefit most when communities pair homes that are attainable for today's local earners with enough new construction to support tomorrow's demand. Des Moines, Iowa and Raleigh, N.C., offer different examples of that balanced approach, but the lesson is the same: sustained progress requires both affordability and supply."

Des Moines Takes the Top Spot
Des Moines earned the nation's highest grade by combining an affordability-component score of 88.3 with a homebuilding-component score of 78.4. The metro's median-priced home of $349,903 requires 27.5% of median household income for a monthly mortgage payment, below the commonly used 30% affordability threshold. Its REALTORS® Affordability Score of 0.894 also stands well above the national average of 0.675.

The metro's permit-to-population ratio of 1.85 means it permits 85% more new homes than would be expected based on its population share and the national average level of construction. Its main opportunity for improvement is the relative cost of new homes: the new-construction premium is 23.4%, placing it in the bottom half of the 100 metros studied.

Raleigh secured the No. 2 position on exceptional building activity. Its permit-to-population ratio of 2.51 and a new-construction premium of -1.3% indicate that builders are delivering homes at a rate well above the metro's population share—and at prices slightly below existing homes. Other A-range metros include Columbia, S.C.; Houston; Indianapolis; Austin; Jacksonville, Fla.; Oklahoma City; Palm Bay, Fla.; and Columbus, Ohio.

Metro	Grade	Affordability Components Score	Homebuilding Components Score	Total Score
Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA	A+	88.3	78.4	83.4
Raleigh-Cary, NC	A+	72.4	93.1	82.8
Columbia, SC	A	71.8	78.9	75.3
Houston et al, TX	A	64.4	85.2	74.8
Indianapolis et al, IN	A	89.1	58.8	73.9
Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX	A-	52.0	92.9	72.5
Jacksonville, FL	A-	64.0	80.8	72.4
Oklahoma City, OK	A-	78.1	63.9	71.0
Palm Bay-Melbourne et al, FL	A-	60.4	80.0	70.2
Columbus, OH	A-	72.9	67.3	70.1

Los Angeles Ranks Last; 13 Metros Receive F Grades
Los Angeles received the lowest overall score, 12.0, driven by an affordability-component score of just 0.9 and a homebuilding-component score of 23.1. With a median listing price of $1,129,415, a median earner would need to spend 84.4% of income on the monthly mortgage payment for a typical home, assuming a 10% down payment and a 6.5% 30-year fixed mortgage. A buyer would need a down payment of roughly 68%, or about $768,000, to bring the monthly payment within the 30% affordability threshold.

Los Angeles' permit-to-population ratio of 0.47 indicates that the metro is permitting less than half the national average of homes per resident. The combination of extreme affordability pressure and limited new supply placed it at the bottom of the class.

The other F-grade metros are Providence, R.I; New York City; Honolulu; Boston; Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, Calif.; San Francisco; Worcester, Mass.; San Diego; Stockton, Calif.; San Jose; Miami; and Riverside, Calif. Several California metros in this group—notably Riverside, San Diego, San Jose and Stockton—posted comparatively stronger homebuilding scores, suggesting that continued construction could improve future affordability conditions.

Metro	Grade	Affordability Components Score	Homebuilding Components Score	Total Score
Los Angeles-Long Beach et al, CA	F	0.9	23.1	12.0
Providence-Warwick, RI-MA	F	11.2	17.1	14.1
New York-Newark et al, NY-NJ	F	8.0	22.5	15.2
Urban Honolulu, HI	F	20.9	13.3	17.1
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA- NH	F	14.1	23.5	18.8
Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA	F	3.0	34.9	18.9
San Francisco-Oakland et al, CA	F	24.6	17.7	21.1
Worcester, MA	F	23.1	19.9	21.5
San Diego et al, CA	F	3.3	45.3	24.3
Stockton-Lodi, CA	F	15.6	41.2	28.4
San Jose-Sunnyvale et al, CA	F	15.2	42.1	28.7
Miami-Fort Lauderdale et al, FL	F	18.9	39.1	29.0
Riverside et al, CA	F	9.2	50.5	29.9

Local Policy as a Lever
Local housing policy, especially zoning and permitting, helps explain the gap between the highest- and lowest-performing metros. For example, Boston has four times as many pages of zoning law as Austin, 79% of its land is zoned compared with 15% in Austin, and minimum parking mandates apply to 88% of Boston land versus 37% of Austin land. Boston also has fewer areas that allow unrestricted ADUs or smaller minimum lots, limiting the supply of compact, more affordable homes.

"Beyond land availability, the biggest difference between the "A" metros and the "F" metros is local housing policy, especially related to zoning and permitting," said Joel Berner, senior economist, Realtor.com^®.  "The "A"s share regulatory flexibility and streamlined approval processes, while the "F"s are locked in restrictive land-use frameworks. One common thread among the "A" metros is that they tend to be blue cities in red states, which is an important distinction in that builders often do not have to deal with the same kind of state-level environmental reviews that they do in many of the "F" metros, and the "A" metros have the latitude to enact pro-housing policy instead."

A Regional Divide Comes Into Focus
The metro results mirror the regional pattern seen in Realtor.com^®'s state report cards: the South and Midwest are home to the strongest performers, while the West and Northeast generally trail. Lower housing costs relative to incomes and higher levels of construction activity are more prevalent in the Midwest and South, where land is often more available and local zoning and permitting policies tend to be more flexible.

Several metros outperformed their state-level results. Raleigh, Jacksonville, Oklahoma City, Palm Bay and Columbus each scored higher than their respective states. Columbus and Oklahoma City stand out in particular: both received A- grades despite Ohio and Oklahoma receiving C+ grades in the 2026 state report cards.

"Metros that make it easier to build—through more flexible zoning, streamlined permitting and policies that support competitively priced new homes—are better positioned to expand access to homeownership," said Berner. "The contrast between Austin and Boston makes clear that the rules governing what can be built can be just as consequential as the land available to build on."

How the Metro Report Cards Work
Each metro receives a 100-point score across two equally weighted dimensions:

• Affordability (50%) combines the median-median affordability measure—how much of a median earner's income is required for the mortgage payment on a median-priced home—with the REALTORS® Affordability Score, which measures the share of for-sale inventory affordable to households at different income levels.

• Homebuilding (50%) combines the permit-to-population ratio, weighted at 80% of the homebuilding score, with the new-construction premium, weighted at 20%. The latter measures how much more or less a newly built home costs than an existing home in the same metro.

Letter grades range from A+ for scores of 77.5 or above to F for scores below 30. The report is based primarily on 2025 data, including Realtor.com^® listing data, 2025 Claritas median household-income estimates, U.S. Census Bureau building-permit and population data, and the REALTORS® Affordability Distribution Curve developed in collaboration with the National Association of REALTORS®.

Rank	Metro	Total Score	Grade	REALTORS® Affordability Score	Median Listing Price	Median Household Income	Permit- to-Population Ratio	New Construction Premium
1	Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA	83.4	A+	0.894	$349,903	$86,700	1.85	23.4 %
2	Raleigh-Cary, NC	82.8	A+	0.772	$450,588	$98,138	2.51	-1.3 %
3	Columbia, SC	75.3	A	0.765	$309,231	$67,573	1.55	-0.2 %
4	Houston et al, TX	74.8	A	0.691	$363,106	$78,845	1.88	6.9 %
5	Indianapolis et al, IN	73.9	A	0.903	$320,326	$79,724	1.18	33.7 %
6	Austin-Round Rock- San Marcos, TX	72.5	A-	0.639	$501,200	$102,412	2.37	-6.0 %
7	Jacksonville, FL	72.4	A-	0.725	$395,711	$81,893	1.68	1.6 %
8	Oklahoma City, OK	71.0	A-	0.799	$320,020	$71,503	1.27	22.5 %
9	Palm Bay-Melbourne et al, FL	70.2	A-	0.700	$381,454	$78,254	1.56	-1.0 %
10	Columbus, OH	70.1	A-	0.776	$369,415	$80,469	1.59	48.3 %
11	Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC	69.2	B+	0.731	$323,313	$66,604	1.44	4.6 %
12	Baton Rouge, LA	69.0	B+	0.807	$303,610	$66,866	1.10	14.6 %
13	Madison, WI	68.6	B+	0.678	$476,399	$90,224	2.19	9.5 %
14	Wichita, KS	68.3	B+	0.795	$291,719	$70,286	1.05	24.2 %
15	Dallas-Fort Worth- Arlington, TX	67.9	B+	0.639	$426,446	$88,783	1.76	8.9 %
16	Louisville et al, KY-IN	67.9	B+	0.834	$316,884	$72,566	0.99	21.1 %
17	Omaha, NE-IA	67.4	B	0.730	$392,076	$85,685	1.43	31.1 %
18	Greenville-Anderson- Greer, SC	65.3	B	0.653	$376,891	$68,443	1.84	-4.8 %
19	Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL	65.2	B	0.595	$339,513	$63,971	2.16	-4.1 %
20	Richmond, VA	64.8	B	0.706	$438,451	$87,394	1.48	20.7 %
21	Birmingham, AL	64.7	B	0.888	$296,866	$71,644	0.79	36.3 %
22	Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL	64.7	B	0.557	$419,163	$74,545	3.58	-11.9 %
23	Charlotte-Concord et al, NC-SC	64.2	B	0.668	$435,584	$81,514	1.72	9.0 %
24	Atlanta-Sandy Springs et al, GA	63.5	B	0.731	$410,517	$87,947	1.17	22.1 %
25	Durham-Chapel Hill, NC	63.3	B	0.663	$478,433	$85,028	2.19	17.4 %
26	North Port-Bradenton et al, FL	63.0	B	0.588	$482,467	$79,132	4.17	-4.6 %
27	Winston-Salem, NC	63.0	B	0.684	$347,266	$66,503	1.48	14.3 %
28	Little Rock et al, AR	62.5	B-	0.796	$295,765	$64,295	0.90	29.9 %
29	Minneapolis et al, MN- WI	61.9	B-	0.788	$431,092	$96,855	0.87	41.0 %
30	Orlando-Kissimmee- Sanford, FL	61.2	B-	0.611	$422,380	$74,895	2.13	10.2 %
31	Tulsa, OK	60.4	B-	0.766	$326,969	$67,365	1.08	32.8 %
32	Dayton-Kettering- Beavercreek, OH	60.3	B-	0.933	$246,794	$69,822	0.54	79.7 %
33	Pittsburgh, PA	59.9	C+	0.947	$245,217	$72,935	0.54	109.0 %
34	Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN	59.7	C+	0.808	$340,163	$80,109	0.71	57.7 %
35	San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX	59.1	C+	0.666	$331,705	$73,281	0.85	4.5 %
36	Deltona-Daytona Beach et al, FL	58.7	C+	0.607	$389,004	$70,068	1.62	4.1 %
37	St. Louis, MO-IL	58.4	C+	0.974	$292,410	$79,869	0.48	58.0 %
38	McAllen-Edinburg- Mission, TX	58.2	C+	0.547	$270,004	$50,862	1.78	6.0 %
39	Charleston-North Charleston, SC	57.4	C	0.563	$509,609	$84,409	1.85	-13.5 %
40	Phoenix-Mesa- Chandler, AZ	57.0	C	0.587	$507,246	$87,718	1.71	-0.4 %
41	Kansas City, MO-KS	56.7	C	0.770	$389,708	$80,127	0.98	77.9 %
42	Tampa-St. Petersburg et al, FL	55.5	C	0.636	$407,810	$73,079	1.48	22.2 %
43	Denver-Aurora- Centennial, CO	55.3	C	0.674	$588,941	$106,833	1.17	10.2 %
44	Detroit-Warren- Dearborn, MI	55.2	C	0.917	$260,977	$72,493	0.45	143.3 %
44	Syracuse, NY	55.2	C	0.778	$309,821	$70,981	0.70	113.6 %
46	Greensboro-High Point, NC	54.8	C	0.685	$331,056	$63,049	1.07	19.0 %
47	Boise City, ID	54.2	C	0.527	$601,110	$86,463	2.47	-6.8 %
48	Cleveland, OH	53.9	C	0.911	$258,140	$68,695	0.43	102.8 %
49	Colorado Springs, CO	53.9	C	0.586	$496,355	$87,756	1.67	17.2 %
50	Baltimore-Columbia- Towson, MD	53.7	C	0.870	$380,365	$95,068	0.46	82.7 %
51	Port St. Lucie, FL	53.5	C	0.554	$439,992	$71,736	1.94	14.0 %
52	Grand Rapids et al, MI	53.4	C	0.717	$398,173	$82,065	0.81	33.1 %
53	Nashville-Davidson et al, TN	52.9	C	0.529	$538,147	$85,166	1.99	6.4 %
54	Washington et al, DC- VA-MD-WV	52.2	C	0.763	$598,044	$123,209	0.63	22.8 %
55	Salt Lake City-Murray, UT	51.6	C	0.590	$577,022	$99,172	1.35	3.8 %
56	Chattanooga, TN-GA	51.2	C	0.640	$406,912	$72,346	1.11	13.3 %
57	Akron, OH	50.7	C	0.962	$235,118	$70,023	0.24	92.6 %
58	Knoxville, TN	50.5	C	0.540	$450,365	$71,491	1.80	14.1 %
59	Philadelphia et al, PA- NJ-DE-MD	50.3	C	0.794	$372,350	$88,483	0.46	84.5 %
60	Memphis, TN-MS-AR	49.8	C	0.795	$332,789	$66,946	0.55	32.8 %
61	Rochester, NY	49.0	C	0.851	$275,937	$71,300	0.37	141.6 %
62	Toledo, OH	48.7	C	0.950	$230,108	$63,133	0.18	119.5 %
63	Jackson, MS	48.7	C	0.793	$312,112	$61,628	0.57	39.9 %
64	Chicago-Naperville- Elgin, IL-IN	47.9	C	0.786	$365,022	$86,627	0.38	42.9 %
65	Tucson, AZ	47.0	C-	0.605	$389,520	$67,909	0.96	6.8 %
66	Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA	46.2	C-	0.762	$349,095	$77,355	0.44	49.0 %
67	Buffalo-Cheektowaga, NY	44.9	C-	0.784	$273,344	$71,055	0.29	140.4 %
68	Scranton--Wilkes- Barre, PA	43.4	C-	0.770	$259,058	$63,615	0.25	73.6 %
69	Las Vegas et al, NV	41.6	C-	0.527	$473,195	$72,504	1.36	23.3 %
70	Portland-South Portland, ME	40.8	C-	0.510	$639,343	$91,640	1.35	13.8 %
71	New Orleans-Metairie, LA	39.4	D+	0.723	$316,040	$61,991	0.40	25.7 %
72	Albuquerque, NM	39.3	D+	0.606	$410,571	$70,405	0.68	10.5 %
73	Spokane-Spokane Valley, WA	38.9	D+	0.490	$499,823	$72,401	1.18	8.7 %
74	Hartford-West Hartford et al, CT	38.8	D+	0.756	$442,735	$94,838	0.29	71.9 %
75	Sacramento- Roseville-Folsom, CA	38.8	D+	0.556	$620,813	$93,641	0.99	12.8 %
76	Allentown-Bethlehem et al, PA-NJ	38.2	D+	0.659	$393,004	$78,744	0.50	57.0 %
77	Virginia Beach et al, VA-NC	37.3	D	0.653	$405,564	$80,312	0.49	47.3 %
78	Albany-Schenectady- Troy, NY	36.6	D	0.663	$438,498	$85,955	0.50	84.7 %
79	New Haven, CT	35.8	D	0.702	$464,921	$92,306	0.40	102.2 %
80	Portland-Vancouver et al, OR-WA	35.5	D	0.546	$600,741	$94,748	0.74	2.7 %
81	Bakersfield-Delano, CA	35.0	D	0.549	$401,636	$66,364	0.78	19.9 %
82	Seattle-Tacoma- Bellevue, WA	34.8	D	0.571	$763,491	$113,456	0.85	23.0 %
83	Milwaukee- Waukesha, WI	34.3	D	0.667	$387,862	$74,222	0.44	83.2 %
84	El Paso, TX	33.2	D	0.516	$297,248	$57,042	0.52	14.7 %
85	Kiryas Joel et al, NY	32.9	D	0.573	$543,942	$92,570	0.70	57.8 %
86	Fresno, CA	30.9	D-	0.509	$470,461	$71,486	0.66	1.9 %
87	Bridgeport-Stamford- Danbury, CT	30.8	D-	0.619	$803,337	$112,815	0.81	177.5 %
88	Riverside et al, CA	29.9	F	0.441	$597,730	$86,146	0.76	5.7 %
89	Miami-Fort Lauderdale et al, FL	29.0	F	0.567	$507,237	$74,274	0.83	248.0 %
90	San Jose-Sunnyvale et al, CA	28.7	F	0.568	$1,348,103	$156,664	0.64	13.9 %
91	Stockton-Lodi, CA	28.4	F	0.520	$589,478	$88,670	0.70	26.8 %
92	San Diego et al, CA	24.3	F	0.379	$954,041	$103,066	0.79	25.7 %
93	Worcester, MA	21.5	F	0.552	$550,000	$89,488	0.43	44.1 %
94	San Francisco- Oakland et al, CA	21.1	F	0.625	$949,395	$133,542	0.38	32.4 %
95	Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA	18.9	F	0.376	$1,007,415	$108,240	0.44	-12.2 %
96	Boston-Cambridge- Newton, MA-NH	18.8	F	0.547	$827,552	$109,295	0.45	35.8 %
97	Urban Honolulu, HI	17.1	F	0.573	$667,500	$99,393	0.33	44.6 %
98	New York-Newark et al, NY-NJ	15.2	F	0.472	$768,727	$94,960	0.51	98.4 %
99	Providence-Warwick, RI-MA	14.1	F	0.451	$572,233	$85,421	0.38	37.4 %
100	Los Angeles-Long Beach et al, CA	12.0	F	0.318	$1,129,415	$91,380	0.47	42.9 %

Methodology
The 2026 report cards are largely based on data with a 2025 reference period. The REALTORS® Affordability Score is derived from the REALTORS® Affordability Distribution Curve, a collaboration with the National Association of Realtors which examines how many listings are affordable to those in a particular income percentile. The Affordability Score varies between 0 and 2 and is a calculation that is equal to twice the area below the Affordability Distribution Curve on a graph. Median list price is calculated for each metro across Realtor.com listings active in 2025. Median Household Income comes from 2025 estimates by Claritas. Permit data comes from the U.S. Census Bureau's Building Permit Survey, and each metro's total is divided by the national total to compute the share. Population data comes from 2025 U.S. Census Bureau estimates, and each metro's total is divided by the national total to compute the share. The new-construction premium comes from comparing the median prices of Realtor.com listings grouped into new builds and existing homes for each metro.

About Realtor.com^®
For over 30 years, Realtor.com^® has connected buyers, sellers, and renters with trusted insights, professional guidance and powerful tools to help them find their perfect home. Recognized as the No. 1 real estate site REALTOR® agents recommend, Realtor.com® delivers consumer connections and a robust suite of marketing tools to support business growth. Realtor.com^® is operated by News Corp [Nasdaq: NWS, NWSA] [ASX: NWS, NWSLV] subsidiary Move, Inc.

Media Contact: Mallory Micetich, press@realtor.com

 

View original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/realtorcom-metro-report-cards-des-moines-earns-top-marks-as-homebuilding-and-affordability-divide-americas-largest-metros-302879664.html

SOURCE Realtor.com

FAQ

AI-generated questions and answers. How Rhea-AI works. Not financial advice.

How does Realtor.com calculate the metro affordability and homebuilding grades?

Each metro receives a 100-point score across two equally weighted dimensions. Affordability (50%) combines how much of a median earner's income is needed for the mortgage on a median-priced home with the REALTORS® Affordability Score, which measures the share of for-sale inventory affordable at different income levels. Homebuilding (50%) combines the permit-to-population ratio, weighted at 80% of the homebuilding score, with the new-construction premium, weighted at 20%, which compares prices of new and existing homes in the same metro.

What role does local housing policy play in metro scores?

Realtor.com’s economists highlight zoning and permitting rules as major drivers of differences between top and bottom metros. The company notes that higher-scoring metros tend to have more flexible land-use regulations and streamlined approvals, while lower-scoring metros operate under more restrictive frameworks, including extensive zoning coverage, broader minimum parking mandates, and fewer areas allowing accessory dwelling units or smaller lots.