It found a slight increase, from 20.8% last year to 21.2% this March, in affordable listings for households with annual incomes of $75,000 – a group that includes teachers, nurses, and skilled trades workers. Households with incomes of $100,000 have also seen a little improvement in affordable listings – from 36.9% to 37.1% year-over-year.

However, in 2019, before the pandemic, buyers in this income bracket would have been able to afford 48.1% of such listings. NAR said this suggested a shortage of nearly 416,000 listings priced at or below $255,000.

And at lower income levels, conditions have worsened. Buyers with incomes below $50,000 would find even fewer listings below $170,000 than a year ago, down from 9.4% to 8.7% now, effectively pricing them out of the market.

At the other end of the spectrum, home buyers earning $250,000 or more can afford at least 80% of homes for sale.

“Understanding these dynamics matters. For REALTORS, it means being able to better guide clients and manage expectations. For local leaders and policymakers, it points to where supply gaps are most urgent. And for homebuilders and developers, it offers a clearer view of where demand is being left unmet,” the report stated.

“The data suggests that our country needs to add at least two affordable homes for middle-income buyers (up to $255,000) for every home listed above $680,000.”

At the same time, the report emphasized that housing is not a single market, but rather thousands of local ones. Each brings its own unique dynamics. What is affordable in one city may not be so in another. Variations in job growth, land use and other policies, as well as infrastructure, demographic trends, and economic conditions — all play a role.

The report identified 30% of the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas as approaching a “balanced housing market.” It noted cities like Akron, St. Louis, Youngstown, and Pittsburgh, which had healthy supply benchmarks, as well as improvements in Raleigh, Des Moines, Grand Rapids, Columbia, SC, and Columbus.

Approximately 44% of the 100 largest metro areas were labeled as “stuck in the middle” – neither in crisis nor thriving, yet still not offering real affordability to most families. This group included Seattle. Cities that have shown some improvement are Austin, Salt Lake City, Denver and San Francisco.

In 26% of the 100 largest metropolitan areas, the report found that “things are actually getting worse; the markets are moving in the wrong direction.” They include Los Angeles, Oxnard, San Diego, New York, and Spokane. In these markets, affordable listings have either declined over the year or remain more than 20 points below the level of a balanced market.

There are also state-level differences. “While some Midwestern and Southern states maintain relatively balanced markets, coastal and Western states remain under intense affordability pressure,” the report noted. Nearly all states remain below pre-pandemic levels.

“These findings highlight the need for local policy solutions that address local constraints and target affordability,” it further stated. “We must build the right homes, at the right prices, and in the right places. The market has not yet corrected for affordability—it requires intentional effort and targeted strategies that prioritize inclusivity and equity.”

NAR called for a multifaceted approach involving all stakeholders, including governments, developers and communities. It also urged methods such as zoning reform, expanding down-payment assistance, removing barriers to entry-level construction, like smaller homes, and investing in solutions that reflect homeowners' realities.

“This is not just a housing issue – it’s an economic, social and generational one,” NAR stated.