sacramento real estate report for 2013

July - December, 2013

www.WrightRealEstate.us (916) 726-8308

Wright Report

Perspectives and Overview of Northern California’s

Residential Real Estate Market:

Statistics and Trends for the United States, State of California, and Northern California

Counties: including Sacramento, Placer, Yolo, El Dorado & San Joaquin Counties.

July to December, 2013

TTHHEE WWRRIIGGHHTT RREEPPOORRTT



Wright Report

The Wright Report

Prepared by:

Prepared By: Joel Wright

Document Version: Final

Last Updated On: March, 2014



Wright Report

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported

License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco,

California, 94105, USA.



Wright Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................... 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:.................................................................................................................... 5

THE EXPERTS WEIGH IN: .................................................................................................................. 6

Sacramento Appraiser: Ryan Lundquist ............................................................................... 6

Rental Housing Association: Jim Lofgren .............................................................................. 8

Real Estate Attorney: Steve Beede ....................................................................................... 9

MARKET UPDATE: .......................................................................................................................... 11

THE ECONOMY: ............................................................................................................................. 16

BANKING & LENDING: ................................................................................................................... 17

DISTRESSED PROPERTIES: .............................................................................................................. 19

COUNTY STATISTICS: ..................................................................................................................... 22

Sacramento County ....................................................................................................................... 22

Placer County ...................................................................................................................... 23

El Dorado County ................................................................................................................ 24

Yolo County ......................................................................................................................... 25

San Joaquin County ............................................................................................................ 27

HISTORICAL PRICE GRAPHS: .......................................................................................................... 29

PLACER COUNTY: ........................................................................................................................... 30

SACRAMENTO COUNTY: ................................................................................................................ 33

RESOURCES: ................................................................................................................................... 41



Wright Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Sacramento experienced some dramatic shifts through 2013. Q1-2

was equal in price gains to the white hot surge of 2004 and 2005 when

the Sacramento market peaked. Q3-4 reflected the slow declines from

2009 - 2011. Overall the County saw very strong appreciation with

the median price increasing 28% for the year, however only 1.7% of

the gain was in the 2nd half of the year.

Strong increases and positive growth are expected for the Sacramento

region in 2014. The market has solidified for several reasons:

increases in the number of homes for sale by more than 100%+ from

January to December, interest rates remain near historic lows,

affordability is above 50%, and the CA economy is improving.

While housing fundamentals have improved dramatically (reduced

foreclosure filings, low interest rates, greater inventory), other factors

seemed to hamper the market during the last half of 2013 (political

uncertainty, flight of large investors, unemployment).

The Housing sector of the National Economy has regained much

ground. The U.S. and California markets experienced substantial gains

in 2013. However, the U.S. economy did not perform very strongly in

2013 and may turn out to be a drag on the housing recovery.

Lending is also expected to become more difficult in 2014 with the

implementation of the Qualified Mortgage (QM) standards which raises

the requirements lenders must use to qualify potential borrowers. One

upside of continued government intrusion into mortgage markets is

that interest rates will likely remain low through 2014.

More good news is the number of distressed property sales in

Sacramento declined 60%+ to represent only 18% of sales in

December 2013. Foreclosed property inventory still held by banks is

also down (-27%) from December 2012 to December 2013.



Wright Report

THE EXPERTS WEIGH IN:

Sacramento Appraiser: Ryan Lundquist

The two chapters of real estate for 2013

There was one real estate market in 2013, but it was split into two chapters. The first

chapter took place from January to June and it was marked by rapid appreciation,

incredibly low housing inventory, very low interest rates and high levels of investor cash.

Between May and June though, the market began to shift, which then became more

noticeable in stats in July. This leads us to chapter two, which took place between July

and December 2013, and was marked by flat values, increasing interest rates, a doubling

of housing inventory and cash investors exiting the market. It was as if the market was

on fire for half the year, but then the momentum shifted in early summer to really slow

things down for the rest of the year.

One of the byproducts of an increase in inventory and flight of cash investors has been

FHA and conventional buyers gaining a better share of the market. In fact, there are

now more FHA sales than cash sales in Sacramento County, which hasn’t happened in

almost two years. The market is ultimately normalizing as inventory increases, which is



Wright Report

leading to buyers generally having more power to negotiate. It is still a Seller’s market,

but buyers are gaining ground.

Foreclosures have basically hit the bottom and short sales have persisted to decline too.

There has been a 1% increase in foreclosures over the past quarter.

Now a new chapter has begun for 2014 and the market is poised to be much more

driven by the fundamentals. It is going to be an interesting ride this coming year to see

how the market unfolds.

Ryan Lundquist is a Certified Real Estate Appraiser in the Greater Sacramento Area. He also

specializes in reducing property taxes. Check out his great Blog at

www.SacramentoAppraisalBlog.com or contact directly at (916) 595-3735.



Wright Report

Rental Housing Association: Jim Lofgren

After struggling for many years, rental housing investors finally are experiencing

increases in both property values and rental income. However, these gains are offset by

increases in utility rates, parcel taxes and regulatory fees.

Tired of cutting programs to balance their budgets, local governing bodies think the

modest improvement in the economy gives them the green light to pursue revenue

enhancements. While many of the proposed or approved increases by themselves seem

minor in terms of the actual percentage or dollar amount, the cumulative effect could

be significant.

Rental owners should anticipate increases in water and waste hauling rates, approval of

new parcel taxes to fund library and fire services, and bumps in regulatory fees, such as

fire inspection fees for multifamily properties. Fortunately, industry advocates,

particularly the Rental Housing Association (RHA), managed to temper most increases.

One bright spot was the changes to the Rental Housing Inspection Program in the City of

Sacramento. At the request of RHA, the City Council amended its mandatory rental

inspection program to include a self-certification option. This change allows rental

owners, whose properties passed the initial inspection, to perform the annual

inspection rather than code enforcement officials. The cost saving change reduced the

need for additional city staff and allowed the City Council to reduce the annual

inspection program fee by 46 percent, from $28 per unit to $16.

On the regulatory front, the forecast of persistent and serious drought conditions will

lead to stricter water conservation measures throughout the region. The voluntary call

for citizens to reduce water consumption by 20 to 25 percent reductions helped, but

residential properties, especially apartment communities, can be water gluttons and,

therefore, will be targets for further conservation measures.

Smoking restrictions continue to be a pesky topic for city and county governments as

their elected officials grapple with both shifts in public opinion and changes in voter-

approved laws within and outside of California. Beyond just restrictions on tobacco

smoke, elected officials now must deal with the cultivation and use of marijuana as well



Wright Report

as the emerging popularity of e-cigarettes. The outcome seems to be trending towards

slightly inconsistent regulations for the various cities and counties in the region.

Mandatory disclosure of no smoking policies, rather than banning of any tobacco

smoking at apartment communities, may be where things are heading.

Some other issues facing rental owners are the best means of eradicating bed bugs (new

HUD guidelines offer some guidance), illegal dumping associated with renters moving

out of apartment communities (new state law will establish used mattress recycling

service), and income verification fraud during rental application process (renters using

internet websites to create bogus paystubs).

Jim Lofgren is the Executive Director of the Rental Housing Association of Sacramento Valley, a

non-profit trade association representing owners and managers of over 80,000 rental units. For

more information, call (916) 920-1120, visit www.RHA.org or email [email protected].

Real Estate Attorney: Steve Beede

LEGAL UPDATE - There has been a lot of change and clarification in the real estate

market over the past several months. Here are some of the highlights as we move

forward in 2014:

1. DEBT FORGIVENESS TAX RELIEF - The biggest question on the minds of

upside-down property owners is whether there is still relief from the Debt

Forgiveness Tax. Technically, there is no relief because the Federal Debt

Forgiveness Act expired on December 31, 2013 and California didn’t even

enact their Relief Act for 2013. However, last Fall, the IRS responding to a

letter from Senator Barbara Boxer stated that there would be no debt

forgiveness tax on short sales conducted under California Code of Civil

Procedures Section 580e (this is the actual law created by the passage of

SB458 in July 2011 and applies only to 1-4 unit residential properties).

California quickly adopted the Fed’s position. So, that’s where it stands

today.



Wright Report

2. COURTS WON’T FORCE THE LENDERS - Years of litigation by upside down

owners complaining of lender misconduct and other errors have achieved nothing

beyond costing those owners litigation costs. Courts have uniformly agreed that: (1) an

oral agreement is not a loan mod; and (2) Foreclosures are generally final. So far, the

Homeowners Bill of Rights has had little effect although lender fears of the attorney fee

provision has led to some settlements. However, the real effect of these rulings may

now be showing up in increased foreclosure starts since the first of the year.

3. SHORT SALES AND AUCTION.COM - Many Realtors have been complaining of

Nationstar and Auction.com interfering with their Contracts by demanding that short

sales be run through Auction.com. CA Bureau of Real Estate (“BRE”) has now

determined that this process is legal for the purpose of validating the Buyer’s offer. If

the auction bid is higher, the Contract Buyer can match the bid and get the Property; if

lower, then the Contract Buyer’s purchase price is affirmed.

4. MARKET STABILIZING - We remain progressing through a slow stabilization of

the real estate market. The low inventory and high demand of last year has now given

way to higher inventory, higher prices, and less demand. In Sacramento, For Sale Listings

are up 96% from last year but the Sold ratio is down 24%! New lending rules are making

loans harder to get and the higher prices are pushing out investors and flippers.

5. GROWING CONCERN - Realtors are being cautioned to be sure that they are

following procedures properly in doing short sales. BRE has been investigating Dual

Agency and tanking Licenses if they find “Sham Agents” or other improprieties.

Similarly, Lenders are stepping up their investigations of Mortgage Fraud and violations

of Arms Length Disclosures. Brokers are being targeted.

Steve Beede For over 20 years, the attorneys of BPE Law Group have been advising and

representing property owners and real estate licensees in dealing with their legal concerns and

maximizing their opportunities. If you would like a consultation with us, please call our office at

(916) 966-2260.



Wright Report

MARKET UPDATE:

The median price across the United States declined slightly to close out

2013 at $197,000. In December, 2013 the CA median sold price hit

$438,040, up 2.2% from June, 2013. That median price is up 55% of

the way to where it was at the peak in 2006 ($594,530), which is a

79% from the 2009 bottom of $245,230.

Affordability, the percent of people who can afford to purchase the

median priced home with 20% down payment, is down 16 points to

32% in California for Q4-13 over last year Q4-12. Sacramento’s

affordability is down 20 points from 71% in Q4-12 to 51% in Q4-13.

In Sacramento County the median price rose 1.7% from June to

December to end the year at $250,000. That is an increase of 28.2%

from the $195,630 median price in December 2012. The average sold

price for Sacramento County for December 2013 was $280,714 up 3%

from June and up 25% from December 2012.

COUNTY Average Sold Price %

Change 12-Dec 13-Dec

Sacramento $224,772 $280,714 25%

Placer $338,571 $403,136 19%

El Dorado $336,308 $381,985 14%

Yolo $312,310 $334,559 7%

Since the market turned downward in September 2005 the median

price for single family homes (SFR) declined 59%, with the lowest

point reaching $160,000 in January 2012. Since that point the market

has risen 56% through December 2013.



Wright Report

During December 2013 18.6% of sales were distressed sales (short

sales or REO); down from 52% from December 2012. Short sales

made up 11.4% of sold properties in December, and REOs (foreclosed

bank owned sales) made up 7.2% of sales.

The inventory of homes available for sale increase substantially during

2013. The year started January 1, 2013 with 989 units available for

sale and on January 1, 2014 it was 2,055. December 2013 had

approximately 1.95 months of unsold inventory for Sacramento

County.

COUNTY Inventory for Sale %

Change

Jan-13 Jan-14

Sacramento 989 2,055 108%

Placer 472 709 50%

El Dorado 428 513 20%

Yolo 132 193 46%

The difference between original listing price and sold price also varied

dramatically in some cases. In December 2013 the average home sold



Wright Report

for 1.6% below the original asking price. The biggest shift, however,

was Short Sales which sold for an average of 11% over list price.

Foreclosures, however, sold for an average of 9.8% below original list

price. This underselling indicates that banks were overpricing their

REO listings, and then had to reduce them to get them in order to sell.

Inventory continues to remain low, especially distressed inventory

which has declined through the year.

Sales of homes across the nation reached just over 5 million units in

2013: up from 4.51 million in 2012.

As sales prices have increased the amount of investor activity has

declined.

Cash sales declined dramatically representing 19.5% of sales in

December 2013. Though still comparatively high for properties priced

under $200,000 it is down from 39.6% in December 2012.



Wright Report

SFR (Single Family Residence) New Home sales reached 428,000 units in

2013, not close to where it has been historically but much better than sales

since 2009. The median New Home sales price for 2013 was $265,800; up

8.4% from 2012. The average sold price was up 10% from the prior year to

$320,900.



Wright Report

New construction numbers while improving are nowhere close to normal

market numbers for the number of sales when compared to the last 50+

years.

One interesting trend is the speed at which different counties are recovering

their prices across California. While Sacramento County has returned in price

38% of the way back to its previous high in 2005, other counties vary

dramatically. Overall CA median price has come up 55% of the way to the

previous high. Some Counties have returned almost completely, like San

Francisco at 87% and San Mateo County at 96%. Others have hardly moved

off the low point like Shasta at 25% and Merced at 25.5%. Clearly the

recovery across the state has not been evenly distributed.

As markets in the bay area, specifically San Francisco and San Jose, drive

upward, the investors and home buyers from that area will spill over into

areas with lower prices and greater opportunity, like Sacramento, just as

they did during the last price run up.



Wright Report

THE ECONOMY:

As housing led the U.S. economy into this recession, so it was expected to

lead the it out again. That is not what seems to have happened.

Housing has made a pretty good recovery with regard to prices and numbers

of sales, but such a recovery has not been shared by the national economy.

GDP growth for the U.S. economy in 2013 was 1.9% which is still

unexpectedly low for the amount the residential markets have risen. At the

time median home prices across the nation rose 11.5% to $197,100. In CA

values rose 19.4% and Sacramento County saw a rise of 28.2%.

Unemployment rates continue to haunt various sectors of the economy, and

while we see positive monthly employment numbers there are some

complaints that this job growth is at the lowest paying sectors of the

economy.

Unemployment in December nationally was 6.5% (not seasonally adjusted).

In Sacramento it was 7.9; a bit better than in CA (8.3%). This also does not

accurately reflect underemployment which is in double digits. Also, while

unemployment has come down, the labor force participation rate (the



Wright Report

percent of the population that is employed) has also come down to a 35 year

low, ending the year at 62.8%. Languishing employment undoubtedly takes

its toll on home sales.

One political occurrence that had a direct impact on the residential markets

last year was the shutdown of the national government from October 1st to

16th. Not only did it shake Main Street’s faith in a functioning government,

but we saw the largest decline in the number of local sales (17%) and drop

in median sales price (3.35%) for a November since the start of the

recession in 2008.

BANKING & LENDING:

Some of the big shifts in the lending world are the introduction of QM

(Qualified Mortgages). These increased standards raise the

requirements of many loans with the intentions of ensuring the quality

of loans being created, which hopefully results in fewer defaulted loans

and foreclosures. It will certainly be more difficult for lenders to

qualify some borrowers and shrink the pool of qualified borrowers

trying to buy today.

Interest Rates after the June FED meeting rose when FED President

Bernanke mentioned, almost in passing, that the purchase of bonds by

the Federal Reserve would need to be decreased. The shock to the

market was immediate and dramatic with interest rates spiking 1 point

within days. Ironically, the FED did actually lower their purchases of

bonds in December 2013 from 85 Billion to 75 Billion and there was

almost no reaction in the markets as far as interest rates are

concerned.

As the year ended so did Bernanke’s term. Janet Yellen his

replacement as president seems to be in lock step with previous FED

policy decisions and the carrying forward the monthly government

bond purchases.



Wright Report

While the 30 year mortgage interest rate remains well below 5%,

4.46% in December, it is still at historically low rates. In fact, the

average mortgage interest rate over the last 32 years is just a bit over

8.5%.

Congress still continues to ponder how to remove Fannie & Freddie

and return private capital to the secondary loan markets; but it is

unlikely to happen until interest rates rise and investors become

convinced that they can make money holding mortgages.

One interesting entrant into the residential lending arena is Blackstone

Group (NYSE:BX) which purchased some 40,000 SFR (Single Family

Residences) over the last couple of years. First, they created a bond

using over 3,000 of the residential properties they own and manage.

The bond was separated into different tiers each paying successively

higher returns based on the amount of risk they are willing to share

with Blackstone.

Next they created B2R Finance (Buy to Rent Finance -

http://www.b2rfinance.com/) a lending group that loans to existing

owners and new owners of residential investment properties. These

groups (or pods as they call them) are assembled with the intent of

creating additional bonds.



Wright Report

The strategy is a stroke of managerial genius as forward thinking

Blackstone makes money several different ways. First, they receive

origination fees as they create the loans, next they get paid to service

the loans, thirdly they make the interest rate on the capital they used

to fund the loans, and lastly they do it one better by bundling the

properties, selling bonds, and using the money from the bonds to free

their capital so they can provide more loans.

The bond concept has 2 distinct benefits over conventional capital:

first bond money can be very inexpensive – under 2%, and second

bond purchasers are also willing to share the risk of reduced rental

collections with Blackstone. All of these provide a very high ROI for

Blackstone Group and its investors.

Another interesting development is the progress of law suits filed by

FHFA (Federal Housing Finance Agency) against 18 lenders for their

fraudulent lending practices between 2005 and 2007. These practices

resulted in huge losses for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for whom FHFA

is responsible. By the end of 2013 six of the eighteen lenders had

settled with FHFA. The three largest of the settlements was Chase for

4 Billion, Deutsche Bank for 1.925 Billion, and UBS Americas for 885

Million. Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial were the other three

lenders that settled for together just over 1.06 Billion. It will be

interesting to see how the other 12 suits unfold.

DISTRESSED PROPERTIES:

In February of 2012 the attorney generals of 49 states sued and won a

25 Billion dollar settlement against the five largest loan servicers in the

U.S. From that time residential lenders began wondering why they

foreclose on properties and play foreclosure roulette with borrowers

and states alike if there are other options available to them. It

appears they decided it is easier to modify mortgages, complete short



Wright Report

sales, or sell them in blocks to investors rather than to foreclose and

sell to consumers.

This liquidation of distressed properties through alternative avenues

drastically reduced inventory of foreclosures on the open market which

drove up prices, and kick started the real estate sector of our national

economy.

In Sacramento county inventories of REOs (bank foreclosed properties)

were reduced dramatically as banks no longer desired to acquire and

hold properties. Instead of doing short sales banks began to perform

loan modifications with borrowers in distress which cut the number of

short sales available for sale. Here are the numbers.

Sacramento County

Inventory for

Sale % of Total Inventory

Short Sales REO

January 1, 2011 1,987 1,416 66%

January 1, 2012 1,157 669 59%

January 1, 2013 137 155 29%

January 1, 2014 183 155 16%

This strategy of reducing inventory to raise prices had been used in

2009 but did not work mostly because many buyers in 2009 were still

working to get themselves out of owning and did not want to keep the

loans they had with the bank. By 2012 buyers that were in trouble

were survivors and wanted to keep their homes. They made their

payments through the heart of the recession and, though in financial

difficulty, they were far more committed to their homes than owners 3

years earlier. These owners, as survivors, were happy to find lending

institutions willing to work with their difficult circumstances.

New Foreclosure Filings: California NOD (Notice of Default) filings

fell 44% and NOT (Notice of Trustee Sale) filings fell 59% from

December 2012 to December 2013. The number of properties that



Wright Report

went back to the bank fell 48% during the same period to 1,875 from

3,578 in December 2012.

In Sacramento the number of filings of NODs fell 51% and NOT filings

fell 58% from December 2012 to December 2013. The number of

properties that went back to the bank fell 37% from December 2012.

The number of days to foreclosure in Sacramento County increased

16% to 292 days and the number of days it took for the banks to sell

to a 3rd party increased to 163 days on average.

Existing Inventory: Pre-foreclosure inventory (NOD - Notice of

Default) in California was down 33% to 38,563 (Dec. 2013) from

57,653 (Dec. 2012). NOT (Notice of Trustee Sale) inventory is down

68% for the same period to 19,332 units, and the number of bank

owned inventory (REOs) is down 30% to 41,842 in December from

59,461 units in December 2012.

Sacramento County Pre-foreclosure inventory went down 36% from

3,062 in Dec. 2012 to 1,956 in Dec. 2013. NOT inventory went down

72% for the same period to 755 units, and the number of bank owned

inventory (REOs) is down 27% to 1,980 units from 2,722 units in

December 2012.



Wright Report

COUNTY STATISTICS:

Sacramento County

2013 ended with 2055 listings on January 1, 2014, up 108% from the

989 listings 1 year earlier - January 1, 2013. REO (Real Estate

Owned- foreclosed properties) inventory stayed the same year to year

at 155 listings and Active Short Sale listings were up 33% over the

same period. Conventional sales inventory was up 146%.

Pending: Pending sales are down 47% from January 1, 2013 to

January 1, 2014: from 3,345 to 1,769 homes. Pending foreclosures

are down 63% and pending short sales are down 72% for the same

period. Pending conventional sales are down .3% to 1,016 homes.

Sold: Sales numbers for SFR (Single Family Residence) for December

2013 were 1,284 units sold in Sacramento County. Foreclosures

accounted for 6% of properties on the market in June, and 7% of

sales. Short sales accounted for 9% of all Active inventory, and 11%



Wright Report

of sales. Conventional sales accounted for the rest (85%) of Active

inventory and 82% of sales.

AVERAGE SOLD PRICE by SELLER

TYPE

# Sold December

2013

# Sold December

2012 Yr/Yr % Change

Average Sold Price

Dec. 13

Average Sold Price

Dec. 12 Yr/Yr % Change

Total Sold 1284 1549 -17.1% $280,714 $224,772 24.9%

REO 92 160 -42.5% $221,998 $182,022 22.0%

Conventional 1046 745 40.4% $291,956 $260,775 12.0%

Short Sale 146 644 -77.3% $237,175 $193,744 22.4%

Placer County

2013 ended with 709 listings on January 1, 2014; up 50% from the

472 listings 1 year earlier in January 1, 2013. REO (Real Estate

Owned- foreclosed properties) inventory was down 17% and Active

Short Sale listings were up 44% over the same period. Conventional

sales inventory are up 57%.



Wright Report


January 1, 2014: from 848 to 465 homes. Pending foreclosures are

down 62% and pending short sales are down 60% for the same

period. Pending conventional sales are down 5% to 286 pending

homes.


2013 were 386 units sold. Foreclosures accounted for 4% of

properties on the market the end of Q4-13, and 4% of sales in

December 2013. Short sales accounted for 7% of all Active inventory,

and 8% of sales. Conventional sales accounted for the rest (90%) of

Active inventory and 89% of sales in June. That is up from 53% of

sales in December of 2012.


TYPE

# Sold December

2013

# Sold December

2012 Yr/Yr % Change

Average Sold Price

Dec. 13

Average Sold Price


Total Sold 386 459 -15.9% $403,136 $338,571 19.1%

REO 14 57 -75.4% $299,494 $241,008 24.3%

Conventional 342 245 39.6% $407,912 $389,187 4.8%

Short Sale 30 157 -80.9% $397,059 $295,004 34.6%

El Dorado County

2013 ended with 513 listings on January 1, 2014; up 20% from the 428

listings 1 year earlier (January 1, 2013.) REO (Real Estate Owned-

foreclosed properties) inventory is down 30% and Active Short Sale

listings are up 9% over the same period. Conventional sales inventory

is up 28%.


January 1, 2014: from 340 to 252 homes. Pending foreclosure sales

are down 58% and pending short sales are down 48% for the same

period. Pending conventional sales are up 19% to 161 homes.



Wright Report




December 2013. Short sales accounted for 6% of all Active inventory,

and 12% of sales. Conventional sales accounted for the rest (90%) of

Active inventory and 82% of sales. That is up from 61.3% of sales in

December of 2012.


TYPE

# Sold December

2013

# Sold December

2012 Yr/Yr % Change

Average Sold Price

Dec. 13

Average Sold Price


Total Sold 201 186 8.1% $381,985 $336,308 13.6%

REO 13 25 -48.0% $325,188 $229,199 41.9%

Conventional 164 114 43.9% $384,687 $366,419 5.0%

Short Sale 24 47 -48.9% $394,285 $320,244 23.1%

Yolo County


132 listings 1 year earlier (January 1, 2013.) REO (Real Estate

Owned- foreclosed properties) inventory is up 17% and Active Short

Sale listings are down 15% over the same period. Conventional sales

inventory is up 62%.


January 1, 2014: from 258 to 156 homes. Pending foreclosures are

down 58% and pending short sales are down 82% for the same

period. Pending conventional sales are up 13% to 103 pending

homes.



Wright Report




December 2013. Short sales accounted for 10% of all Active

inventory, and 81% of sales. Conventional sales accounted for the

rest (83%) of Active inventory and 12% of sales. That is up from 56%

of sales in December of 2012.


TYPE

# Sold December

2013

# Sold December

2012 Yr/Yr % Change

Average Sold Price

Dec. 13

Average Sold Price


Total Sold 118 118 0.0% $334,559 $312,310 7.1%

REO 8 13 -38.5% $234,404 $255,931 -8.4%

Conventional 14 66 -78.8% $277,250 $343,451 -19.3%

Short Sale 96 39 146.2% $351,262 $278,403 26.2%



Wright Report

San Joaquin County


636 listings 1 year earlier (January 1, 2013.) REO (Real Estate

Owned- foreclosed properties) inventory is down 25% and Active Short

Sale listings are down 40% over the same period. Conventional sales

inventory is up 66%.


January 1, 2014: from 1,597 to 882 homes. Pending foreclosures are

down 67%. Pending short sales are down 69%, and pending

conventional sales are up 12% to 491 homes.



properties on the market the end of Q4-13, and 6% of sales in June



Wright Report

2013. Short sales accounted for 8% of all Active inventory, and 16%

of sales. Conventional sales accounted for the rest (85%) of Active

inventory and 77% of sales. That is up from 46.8% of sales in

December of 2012.


TYPE

# Sold December

2013

# Sold December

2012 Yr/Yr % Change

Average Sold Price

Dec. 13

Average Sold Price


Total Sold 560 725 -22.8% $262,437 $204,235 28.5%

REO 36 135 -73.3% $180,880 $161,250 12.2%

Conventional 434 339 28.0% $276,920 $224,778 23.2%

Short Sale 90 251 -64.1% $225,219 $199,610 12.8%



Wright Report

HISTORICAL PRICE GRAPHS:



Wright Report

PLACER COUNTY:



Wright Report

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

Jan

-97

Jan

-98

Jan

-99

Jan

-00

Jan

-01

Jan

-02

Jan

-03

Jan

-04

Jan

-05

Jan

-06

Jan

-07

Jan

-08

Jan

-09

Jan

-10

Jan

-11

Jan

-12

Jan

-13

Placer Zip Code Comparison:

Granite Bay, & Loomis

Placer Market Median Loomis Granite Bay



Wright Report



Wright Report

SACRAMENTO COUNTY:



Wright Report



Wright Report

RESOURCES:

ABREVIATIONS

CAR = California Association of Realtors

HAFA = Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternative

HAMP = Home Affordable Mortgage Program

MLS = Multiple Listing Service

NAR = National Association of Realtors

NOD = Notice of Default

NOT = Notice of Trustee Sale

REO = Real Estate Owned by a bank, or foreclosure

SAR = Sacramento Association of Realtors

WRE = Wright Real Estate

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

MetrolistMLS.com - to search for properties. www.metrolistmls.com

NorthState Building Industry Association (BIA) www.northstatebia.org

Rental Housing Association (RHA) www.rha.org

Sacramento Association of Realtors (SAR) www.sacrealtor.org



Wright Report

Serving Sacramento since 2000.

Check out our BLOG and additional STATISTICS on the web at:

www.WrightRealEstate.US

For FREE Information and Consulting Services contact us:

Office: 916.726.8308 [email protected]

sacramento real estate report for 2013

Real Estate

sacramento county

sacramento market

placer county

county statistics

yolo county

dorado county

wright report perspectives

san joaquin county