Connect with us

Markets

Data Shows Investing is Heavily Biased by Geography

Published

on

Data Shows Investing is Heavily Biased by Geography

Data Shows Investing is Heavily Biased by Geography

For investors, there’s no place like home. Data shows that investors are heavily sector-biased based on where they live.

Openfolio.com, a platform tracking the performance and activity of 40,000 investors, calculated the overall popularity for the top 2,000 stocks and funds owned by its users in the United States. The data was then segmented based on sector and geography.

The results are clear: the West Coast of the United States loads up on tech stocks and the Northeast loves financials more than anyone else. The states along the Gulf of Mexico buy more energy stocks, and states in the Midwest are more likely to own industrials. Interestingly enough, the most balanced sector was healthcare, which all geographic regions seemed to own equally.

The real question is: what kind of returns did investors get? Over the course of 2014, the average investor on the West Coast led the pack with a 5.9% performance. The Midwest averaged 4.7% and the Northeast got 4.5% returns. The Southeast, which has a bias towards energy stocks, was likely hard hit by the oil price crash with the lowest average of 3.1%.

Familiarity with sectors and industries plays a big role, and it makes sense. People exposed to the technology sector in places like Silicon Valley and Seattle are more likely to feel comfortable investing in tech-related equities. While it is a good thing to invest in areas where one feels comfortable, it can also create asset allocation and risk problems. This is why it is important for investors to know their biases and to manage their portfolios accordingly.

Click for Comments

Markets

Mapped: The World’s Least Affordable Housing Markets in 2024

See which housing markets are considered ‘impossibly unaffordable’ according to their median price-to-income ratio.

Published

on

The World’s Least Affordable Housing Markets in 2024

This was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Many cities around the world have become very expensive to buy a home in, but which ones are the absolute most unattainable?

In this graphic, we highlight a number of housing markets that are deemed to be “impossibly unaffordable” in 2024, ranked by their median price-to-income ratio.

This data comes from the Demographia International Housing Affordability Report, which is produced by the Chapman University Center for Demographics and Policy.

Data and Key Takeaway

The median price-to-income ratio compares median house price to median household income within each market. A higher ratio (higher prices relative to incomes) means a city is less affordable.

See the following table for all of the data we used to create this graphic. Note that this analysis covers 94 markets across eight countries: Australia, Canada, China, Ireland, New Zealand, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

RankMetropolitan MarketCountryMedian price-to-income
ratio
1Hong Kong (SAR)🇨🇳 China16.7
2Sydney🇦🇺 Australia13.8
3Vancouver🇨🇦 Canada12.3
4San Jose🇺🇸 U.S.11.9
5Los Angeles🇺🇸 U.S.10.9
6Honolulu🇺🇸 U.S.10.5
7Melbourne🇦🇺 Australia9.8
8San Francisco🇺🇸 U.S.9.7
9Adelaide🇦🇺 Australia9.7
10San Diego🇺🇸 U.S.9.5
11Toronto🇨🇦 Canada9.3
12Auckland🇳🇿 New Zealand8.2

According to the Demographia report, cities with a median price-to-income ratio of over 9.0 are considered “impossibly unaffordable”.

We can see that the top city in this ranking, Hong Kong, has a ratio of 16.7. This means that the median price of a home is 16.7 times greater than the median income.

Which Cities are More Affordable?

On the flipside, here are the top 12 most affordable cities that were analyzed in the Demographia report.

RankMetropolitan MarketCountryMedian price-to-income
ratio
1Pittsburgh🇺🇸 U.S.3.1
2Rochester🇺🇸 U.S.3.4
2St. Louis🇺🇸 U.S.3.4
4Cleveland🇺🇸 U.S.3.5
5Edmonton🇨🇦 Canada3.6
5Buffalo🇺🇸 U.S.3.6
5Detroit🇺🇸 U.S.3.6
5Oklahoma City🇺🇸 U.S.3.6
9Cincinnati🇺🇸 U.S.3.7
9Louisville🇺🇸 U.S.3.7
11Singapore🇸🇬 Singapore3.8
12Blackpool & Lancashire🇬🇧 U.K.3.9

Cities with a median price-to-income ratio of less than 3.0 are considered “affordable”, while those between 3.1 and 4.0 are considered “moderately unaffordable”.

See More Real Estate Content From Visual Capitalist

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to check out Ranked: The Most Valuable Housing Markets in America.

Continue Reading
GraniteShares ETFs MSFL Microsoft LEveraged ETF 2X Long

Subscribe

Popular