0
0
0

Chicagoland supply balances, but numbers vary wildly by county

by Meg White

RE/MAX released its June 2019 Housing Report for Chicagoland today, and while overall indicators show slower sales and moderately increasing prices, the view depends a great deal on which county you’re selling in.

According to the report, Chicagoland home sales took an 11.1 percent dive over last year and were down 1.6 percent over last month. Median sales prices were up a modest 0.2 percent and days on the market went up by one over last year but were down three days over last month.

In terms of inventory, Chicagoland has been slowly moving toward a healthier supply. Last year around this time, the market had around 2.9 month’s supply on offer, and this year we have 4.3 months, which is about 72 percent of the six months that is considered balanced. June was a monumental month in terms of this figure, up from just 3.5 month’s supply in May. 

Paul Wells of RE/MAX of Barrington characterized these numbers as good for Chicagoland buyers. “Interest rates are crazy low and buyers are still buying,” Wells noted in a news release accompanying the report. “When you combine great rates with level prices, buyers are poised for a big win.”

Though these were the numbers for Chicagoland overall, there was a fair amount of variation in each county. Cook, DuPage and Will counties all saw double-digit decreases in home sales, with other counties generally seeing more moderate change. And two counties, Grundy and DeKalb, bucked the trend by clocking gains in home sales, with 4.3 and 1.2 percent increases, respectively. 

All counties registered modest increases in median sales price other than DuPage, Kendall, Lake and McHenry, which calculated losses ranging from 1.3 percent to 4.8 percent.   

In terms of time on the market, the range of year-over-year change was especially wide. Only Will County saw a decrease in terms of properties’ days on market. But Kendall, DeKalb and Grundy all saw wild increases of 11, 20 and 35 days on the market compared to last year.

Read More Related to This Post

Join the conversation

New Subscribe

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.