Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA
Cycle Phase
Seattle experienced a market correction from early 2025 through mid-2025. Elevated inventory persists, suggesting the market hasn't fully normalized.
Building activity may be outpacing demand absorption
Seattle's housing market shows average risk, ranking 108th of 287 metros. The market recently entered Hypersupply. Inventory levels are elevated, warranting monitoring.
Executive Summary
Risk is Neutral, driven primarily by migration and employment. The market is in Hypersupply phase. Liquidity is watch and valuation is balanced.
Top Risk Drivers (This Month)
Market Signals
Inventory is elevated (+29% YoY) and days on market are up +6% — supply is building but not yet at stress levels.
Liquidity
Valuation
Factor Details
Factor Breakdown
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)
Underlying Values
| Metric | Value | Pctile |
|---|---|---|
| Price Momentum | +0.8% | p25 |
| Permit Growth | -11.8% | p32 |
| Permits/1K Pop | 3.84 | p51 |
| Affordability | 0.27 | p43 |
| Employment | -0.1% | p70 |
| Net AGI Migration | -$2M | p98 |
National ContextDoes not affect score
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 SignalsDoes not affect score
Metro Permit Activity
Permit Activity
Sharp CoolingRaw signal — not the composite percentile
Relative to 2016–2019 norms for this metro
Sharp building pullback with softening demand. Mixed signals — builders saw weakness early, but demand hasn't fully deteriorated yet.
Liquidity
Liquidity
Internal Structure
Seattle's counties diverge significantly — Snohomish County (High Risk) contrasts sharply with Pierce County, making the metro average potentially misleading.
Seattle, WA shows High internal divergence — the metro composite may obscure significant county-level differences. Snohomish County contributes the most structural risk (High Risk, driven by price momentum), while Pierce County anchors the lower end (Low Risk).
| County | Score ▼ |
|---|---|
Snohomish CountyRisk Driver | 83 |
King County | 50 |
Pierce CountyStabilizer | 17 |
Score History
| Month | Score |
|---|---|
| 2025-11 | 56 |
| 2025-10 | 48 |
| 2025-08 | 55 |
| 2025-06 | 58 |
| 2025-05 | 56 |
| 2025-03 | 56 |
| 2024-12 | 53 |
| 2024-10 | 63 |
| 2024-08 | 58 |
| 2024-06 | 62 |
| 2024-03 | 60 |
| 2024-02 | 61 |
| 2023-12 | 59 |
| 2023-09 | 61 |
| 2023-08 | 60 |
| 2023-06 | 55 |
| 2023-04 | 54 |
| 2023-02 | 53 |
| 2023-01 | 51 |
| 2022-11 | 53 |
| 2022-09 | 54 |
| 2022-08 | 50 |
| 2022-06 | 59 |
| 2022-04 | 59 |
| 2022-02 | 58 |
| 2022-01 | 60 |
| 2021-11 | 58 |
| 2021-09 | 62 |
| 2021-07 | 66 |
| 2021-05 | 70 |
| 2021-03 | 69 |
| 2020-12 | 69 |
| 2020-11 | 68 |
| 2020-09 | 68 |
| 2020-08 | 68 |
| 2020-06 | 66 |
| 2020-05 | 64 |
| 2020-03 | 55 |
| 2020-01 | 55 |
| 2019-11 | 38 |
| 2019-08 | 35 |
| 2019-06 | 34 |
| 2019-04 | 36 |
| 2019-03 | 37 |
| 2019-01 | 43 |