Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH
Executive Summary
Boston's housing market shows average risk, ranking 140th of 287 metros. The market recently entered Hypersupply. Inventory levels are elevated, warranting monitoring. Inventory accumulating faster than demand — the market is shifting toward buyers.
Boston experienced a market correction from mid-2025 through mid-2025. Elevated inventory persists, suggesting the market hasn't fully normalized.
Inventory is elevated (+25% YoY) and days on market are up +0% — supply is building but not yet at stress levels.
Rent growth is roughly keeping pace with price appreciation, suggesting valuations are not stretched.
Cycle Phase
Building activity may be outpacing demand absorption
Key Dynamics
Risk is primarily driven by migration and employment, while permits per capita provides the most support.
Top Drivers
Market Signals
Inventory is elevated (+25% YoY) and days on market are up +0% — supply is building but not yet at stress levels.
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
Oversupply with deteriorating transactions and no credit excuse. Supply-driven correction risk is elevated.
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
Permit activity is typical but demand is softening. Price pressure is forming on the demand side — this is not a supply problem.
Employment Concentration
Employment
DiversifiedInternal Structure
Boston's 7 counties show moderate divergence — Rockingham County carries the most risk (Elevated) while Essex County anchors the lower end.
Boston, MA-NH shows Moderate internal divergence — some counties diverge meaningfully from the metro picture. Rockingham County contributes the most structural risk (Elevated, driven by price momentum), while Essex County anchors the lower end (Low Risk).
| County | Score ▼ |
|---|---|
Rockingham CountyRisk Driver | 71 |
Strafford County<5% | 67 |
Suffolk County | 62 |
Plymouth County | 46 |
Norfolk County | 42 |
Middlesex County | 37 |
Essex CountyStabilizer | 25 |
Score History
| Month | Score |
|---|---|
| 2025-11 | 58 |
| 2025-10 | 58 |
| 2025-09 | 58 |
| 2025-07 | 57 |
| 2025-06 | 59 |
| 2025-04 | 58 |
| 2025-02 | 58 |
| 2025-01 | 58 |
| 2024-11 | 57 |
| 2024-10 | 56 |
| 2024-08 | 60 |
| 2024-05 | 59 |
| 2024-03 | 57 |
| 2023-12 | 57 |
| 2023-09 | 56 |
| 2023-08 | 56 |
| 2023-06 | 55 |
| 2023-03 | 50 |
| 2023-02 | 50 |
| 2022-12 | 50 |
| 2022-11 | 49 |
| 2022-10 | 49 |
| 2022-08 | 48 |
| 2022-06 | 46 |
| 2022-03 | 44 |
| 2022-01 | 44 |
| 2021-11 | 44 |
| 2021-09 | 45 |
| 2021-07 | 43 |
| 2021-04 | 45 |
| 2021-03 | 54 |
| 2021-01 | 54 |
| 2020-12 | 53 |
| 2020-10 | 54 |
| 2020-08 | 55 |
| 2020-06 | 56 |
| 2020-04 | 53 |
| 2020-02 | 46 |
| 2020-01 | 46 |
| 2019-11 | 46 |
| 2019-08 | 45 |
| 2019-05 | 46 |
| 2019-04 | 47 |
| 2019-02 | 49 |
| 2019-01 | 50 |