While it’s tempting to identify culprits that help explain the dismal state of the housing market—Boomers, say, or institutional investors—some metro areas are quietly crafting policies that ensure housing remains affordable.
Local housing policy, particularly related to zoning and permitting, is a major factor that distinguishes those metro areas that rank highly for affordability from those that don’t. That’s one of the takeaways from a new report from Realtor.com, which graded the 100 largest metropolitan areas based on whether homes are affordable for local earners and whether there’s enough new construction to meet future demand.
Des Moines, Iowa topped the ranking, followed by Raleigh, North Carolina—the only two metro areas to receive an “A+” grade from the Austin-based real estate site. The remaining eight metro areas that scored an “A” were likewise located in the Midwest and South, reflecting what’s now become a clear geographic split in the nation’s housing market.
More homebuilding is key to improving affordability in a lasting way, according to Danielle Hale, chief economist at Realtor.com. “The metros at the top of these rankings show that buyers benefit most when communities pair homes that are attainable for today’s local earners with enough new construction to support tomorrow’s demand.”
The 10 highest-graded metropolitan areas are:
- Des Moines, Iowa
- Raleigh, North Carolina
- Columbia, South Carolina
- Houston, Texas
- Indianapolis, Indiana
- Austin, Texas
- Jacksonville, Florida
- Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
- Palm Bay, Florida
- Columbus, Ohio
The median listing price of homes in all of the “A”-graded metro areas was less than about $450,000, with the exception of Austin, where the median listing price of homes is about $501,000.
WHY LOCAL POLITICS MATTER
But median listing price only tells part of the story, as some metro areas—including in parts of the South and Midwest—have homes that sell for less than $300,000 but don’t score highly for new construction activity.
The new report provides more granularity to Realtor.com’s long-running state report cards, which has identified a sharpened regional pattern in recent years. In the 2026 ranking, every “A” and “B” grade was awarded to states in either the South or Midwest.
Local politics play a big role in affordability and all of the cities that scored an “A” on the metro report share regulatory flexibility and streamlined approval processes in common, according to Joel Berner, a senior economist with the real estate site.
“Metros that make it easier to build—through more flexible zoning, streamlined permitting and policies that support competitively priced new homes—are better positioned to expand access to homeownership,” Berner said in a statement.
“One common thread among the “A” metros is that they tend to be blue cities in red states, which is an important distinction in that builders often do not have to deal with the same kind of state-level environmental reviews that they do in many of the “F” metros, and the “A” metros have the latitude to enact pro-housing policy instead,” he added.
WHERE AFFORDABILITY, HOMEBUILDING IS FAILING
At the other end of the spectrum, the 13 metro areas that scored a “F” grade also have a few things in common—namely, they’re all located in either California or the Northeast. The metro areas that scored lowest on affordability and homebuilding are:
- Los Angeles, California
- Providence, Rhode Island
- New York, New York
- Honolulu, Hawaii
- Boston, Massachusetts
- Oxnard, California
- San Francisco, California
- Worcester, Massachusetts
- San Diego, California
- Stockton, California
- San Jose, California
- Miami, Florida
- Riverside, California
With a median listing price of more than $1.1 million, among the highest, Los Angeles ranked last out of the 100 metro areas for affordability as the city’s permitting activity for new construction is less than half the national average of homes per resident.
Of course, California has earned a reputation for being heavily regulated and it may take time to unwind some of the policies that affect housing affordability. At the very least, the report may give potential homebuyers ideas of where they may want to relocate.
For example, the economists compared two major tech hubs—Austin and Boston—to scrutinize the role that local housing policy can play in affordability. They found that Boston, which scored an “F,” has four times as many pages of zoning law as Austin, which scored an “A.” What’s more, 79% of Boston’s land is zoned compared with only 15% in Austin.
“The contrast between Austin and Boston makes clear that the rules governing what can be built can be just as consequential as the land available to build on,” Berner said.
