Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX
Executive Summary
Beaumont's housing market shows average risk, ranking 193rd of 287 metros. The market recently entered Expansion. Current conditions are balanced with stable liquidity. Broad-based growth with healthy fundamentals.
Beaumont experienced a market correction from mid-2024 through mid-2024. The market has since normalized and entered Expansion.
Inventory is declining (-8% YoY), indicating a tight market with limited supply.
Rent growth is roughly keeping pace with price appreciation, suggesting valuations are not stretched.
Cycle Phase
Normal growth conditions with balanced fundamentals
Key Dynamics
Risk is primarily driven by migration and permit growth, while price momentum provides the most support.
Top Drivers
Market Signals
Inventory is declining (-8% YoY), indicating a tight market with limited supply.
Liquidity
Valuation
Factor Details
12-month HPI change — higher = overheating
YoY permit change — higher = supply pressure
Permits per 1,000 residents — higher = overbuilding risk
Mortgage payment / income — higher = more burdened
12-month employment change (risk inverted)
Net AGI migration (risk inverted)
National Context
Credit Conditions
Credit Regime
Normal expansion. Credit is available, transactions are healthy — no constraints on current growth momentum.
Supply Pipeline
Supply Regime
Supply pipeline is building up while credit remains available. New units are accumulating in the system — watch for delivery pressure in coming quarters.
Local Signals
Metro Permit Activity
Permit Activity
NormalRaw signal — not the composite percentile
Relative to 2016–2019 norms for this metro
Supply and demand are in equilibrium. No unusual activity on either side of the market.
Employment Concentration
Employment
ModerateInternal Structure
Beaumont's 3 counties show similar risk profiles — the metro-level score is broadly representative.
Beaumont, TX shows Low internal divergence — county-level differences are minor and the metro composite is broadly representative. Hardin County contributes the most structural risk (Elevated, driven by price momentum), while Orange County anchors the lower end (Below Average).
| County | Score ▼ |
|---|---|
Hardin CountyRisk Driver | 62 |
Jefferson County | 50 |
Orange CountyStabilizer | 38 |
Score History
| Month | Score |
|---|---|
| 2025-11 | 35 |
| 2025-09 | 41 |
| 2025-08 | 37 |
| 2025-06 | 46 |
| 2025-05 | 46 |
| 2025-03 | 48 |
| 2025-02 | 42 |
| 2024-12 | 34 |
| 2024-11 | 39 |
| 2024-10 | 43 |
| 2024-08 | 37 |
| 2024-06 | 30 |
| 2024-05 | 31 |
| 2024-04 | 32 |
| 2024-03 | 44 |
| 2024-01 | 40 |
| 2023-10 | 35 |
| 2023-09 | 35 |
| 2023-07 | 36 |
| 2023-06 | 35 |
| 2023-04 | 35 |
| 2023-02 | 38 |
| 2023-01 | 36 |
| 2022-11 | 37 |
| 2022-09 | 33 |
| 2022-06 | 35 |
| 2022-04 | 40 |
| 2022-02 | 40 |
| 2022-01 | 45 |
| 2021-11 | 46 |
| 2021-08 | 46 |
| 2021-07 | 46 |
| 2021-05 | 45 |
| 2021-04 | 45 |
| 2021-02 | 46 |
| 2020-11 | 46 |
| 2020-09 | 54 |
| 2020-08 | 52 |
| 2020-06 | 54 |
| 2020-05 | 51 |
| 2020-03 | 50 |
| 2019-12 | 42 |
| 2019-09 | 46 |
| 2019-06 | 52 |
| 2019-04 | 52 |
| 2019-02 | 48 |
| 2019-01 | 48 |