Kansas City, MO-KS
Executive Summary
Kansas City's housing market shows average risk, ranking 111th of 273 metros. The market recently entered Expansion. Current conditions are balanced with stable liquidity. Broad-based growth with healthy fundamentals.
Kansas City experienced a market correction from mid-2025 through late 2025. The market has since normalized and entered Expansion.
Inventory is roughly flat (-0% YoY) with homes selling at a normal pace — a balanced market.
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 affordability provides the most support.
Top Drivers
Market Signals
Inventory is roughly flat (-0% YoY) with homes selling at a normal pace — a balanced market.
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
ElevatedRaw signal — not the composite percentile
Relative to 2016–2019 norms for this metro
Above-normal building activity with healthy demand. Balanced expansion — the market is absorbing new supply without stress.
Employment Concentration
Employment
Limited dataInternal Structure
Kansas City's 14 counties show moderate divergence — Johnson County carries the most risk (Elevated) while Clay County anchors the lower end.
Kansas City, MO-KS shows Moderate internal divergence — some counties diverge meaningfully from the metro picture. Johnson County contributes the most structural risk (Elevated, driven by affordability), while Clay County anchors the lower end (Below Average).
| County | Score ▼ |
|---|---|
Platte County<5% | 77 |
Johnson CountyRisk Driver | 71 |
Miami County<5% | 66 |
Jackson County | 64 |
Wyandotte County | 62 |
Clinton County<5% | 62 |
Bates County<5% | 56 |
Lafayette County<5% | 50 |
Ray County<5% | 42 |
Linn County<5% | 42 |
Cass County<5% | 40 |
Leavenworth County<5% | 34 |
Clay CountyStabilizer | 31 |
Caldwell County<5% | 4 |
Score History
| Month | Score |
|---|---|
| 2026-06 | 54 |
| 2025-12 | 58 |
| 2025-09 | 66 |
| 2025-07 | 61 |
| 2025-05 | 63 |
| 2025-04 | 64 |
| 2025-02 | 63 |
| 2025-01 | 62 |
| 2024-11 | 58 |
| 2024-09 | 56 |
| 2024-07 | 61 |
| 2024-04 | 56 |
| 2024-03 | 57 |
| 2024-01 | 63 |
| 2023-10 | 61 |
| 2023-08 | 64 |
| 2023-06 | 58 |
| 2023-05 | 58 |
| 2023-03 | 57 |
| 2023-02 | 60 |
| 2022-12 | 56 |
| 2022-09 | 56 |
| 2022-07 | 59 |
| 2022-04 | 60 |
| 2022-02 | 59 |
| 2022-01 | 63 |
| 2021-11 | 56 |
| 2021-10 | 56 |
| 2021-08 | 59 |
| 2021-05 | 63 |
| 2021-04 | 61 |
| 2021-02 | 58 |
| 2021-01 | 57 |
| 2020-11 | 52 |
| 2020-09 | 53 |
| 2020-07 | 51 |
| 2020-04 | 51 |
| 2020-01 | 50 |
| 2019-10 | 60 |
| 2019-07 | 62 |
| 2019-04 | 60 |
| 2019-02 | 64 |
| 2019-01 | 63 |