Weekly Real Estate News
Summary
An MBA Research Institute for Housing America study finds quality-adjusted rental affordability declined in 232 of 282 U.S. metropolitan areas between 2014 and 2023. Its estimated average deterioration equals $256 in annual renter income, while housing quality changes may explain as much as half of rising rental expenditures. The study is historical and does not measure 2026 conditions.
Renting became less affordable in 232 of 282 U.S. metropolitan areas between 2014 and 2023, according to a new study from the Mortgage Bankers Association’s Research Institute for Housing America. The finding is striking, but the researchers’ method also complicates a familiar assumption about why rent bills rose: part of the increase reflects households occupying better or different housing.
The November 3 research announcement summarizes a study by Syracuse University economist Gary Engelhardt that uses American Community Survey data to examine rental costs alongside changes in housing quality and household demand. After accounting for quality, the researchers estimate that the average deterioration in affordability was equivalent to a $256 annual reduction in renter household income. That is an economic measure derived from the model, not a $256 rent increase or a reported change in paychecks.
What the 82% figure measures
The study covers 2014 through 2023, rather than the current rental market. Affordability worsened in 232 metros and improved in 50 under the study’s measure. The largest estimated decline occurred in Mount Vernon-Anacortes, Washington, equivalent to a $1,212 annual income loss per renter household. Mankato, Minnesota, had the largest improvement, equivalent to $964 in additional annual income.
The authors say improvements in housing quality may explain as much as half the growth in rental expenditures over the period studied. That does not establish that half of every renter’s rent increase paid for improvements, nor does it mean renters facing higher bills can necessarily afford them. It describes an estimated aggregate relationship between expenditures and the housing households consume.
Why the distinction matters
Common affordability measures compare rent with income or count households paying more than a specified share of income for housing. Those remain useful measures of cash-flow pressure. The new research asks a different question: how much did the economic cost of obtaining a comparable level of housing change once improvements and shifts in demand are taken into account?
For policymakers, the difference affects the interpretation of rising rents. A market where households are choosing larger or better-equipped homes poses different questions from one where comparable units have become sharply more expensive. Both conditions can occur together, and the national average can conceal steep deterioration in particular cities.
There are limits to applying the results today. The study period ends in 2023, so it does not directly measure the subsequent changes in rents, household income, construction deliveries or borrowing costs. Its quality-adjusted measure also should not replace current data on rent burdens, evictions or available affordable units.
The research adds a useful caution for builders, investors and housing agencies evaluating long-run rental affordability. It does not erase the pressure on households paying more each month. It offers a way to distinguish how much of that pressure reflects the price of comparable housing from changes in what households rent.
