Comparing stock on market

By Leith van Onselen

Earlier this week, I reported how, according to RP Data, the number of homes for sale nationally in the week ending 6 May 2012 was some 13% (34,290) higher than in the corresponding week of 2011, with Victoria (up 18,879 or 36%) leading the way:

I didn’t realise at the time, but rival housing data provider, SQM Research, had also published stock on market statistics for the month of April 2012, which showed only a modest 0.3% increase in stock levels over the year, with Melbourne up by only 11.2% or 4,879 units (see table).

Obviously, both datasets are not directly comparable, since RP Data’s is shown at the state levels whereas SQMs is at the capital city level. Nevertheless, the divergence between the two data providers is interesting, and likely pertains to differences in the sources and methodologies used to collect the data.

Regardless of the diferences between the two series, stock on market across Australia looks to be highly elevated; albeit more so according to RP Data:

Confused? Yeah, me too…

[email protected]

Unconventional Economist
Latest posts by Unconventional Economist (see all)


  1. Yeah Canberra’s increase of 1500 in one month according to SQM was mind boggling.

    SQM mentioned that they now include listings on, which is where essentially all ACT properties for sale are listed. But they count a 75% increase as a slight increase!?!

    Still, SQM’s numbers are far more accurate for Canberra than RP Data’s numbers, which I presume are largely taken from where only a fraction of Canberra’s properties for sale are listed. Canberra is probably a unique outlier in this regard.

    • I have to agree, in Canberra is where you sell a home. In August 2010 when we sold our place ourselves and we only advertised on AllHomes. We posted the listing late Friday afternoon with a Mid-day Saturday open house. In less then 24 hours we got 5-6 groups through our Queanbeyan unit and had an offer in hand half way thru the open house (which we eventually took).

      So, no Relitter, a $795 listing fee (I think, no where near the now $1,295, Jebus!) and a few hundred in Lawyers fees, we sold for under $1,500 in sellers/closing costs. We needed nothing other then AllHomes and the Lawyer.

  2. It’s so annoying that the numbers are out of whack. Who do you trust? The data is out there, it shouldn’t be that hard to get an accurate picture!

  3. We see here the currently listed properties. Behind this group sits a larger cohort of available for sale properties whose owners hope prices will pick up so they can exit.

    How many?

    Impossible to tell. But as each month passes this group swells more.

    The landless show no interest in taking up the big mortgages necessary to buy at these prices.

    Something has to give, and it wont be the millennial Homesteaders.

    • Agh, California circa 2007… it was a simpler time…

      On a serious note, I saw exactly this Buyers Strike in the data for Sacramento, CA (and to a lesser degree, the US as a whole) ’round about 2007. I think we all know what happened (happens) next…

      ‘Course… it IS different here! But my theory on different is that we have a lot of catching up to do, so our falls will be faster then normal (which generally mirror the upswing)…

      But time will tell.

      Oh, and Mr. Collyer, you forgot your “Don’t Buy Now!”

      • Aristophrenia

        No need, it goes without saying now that the message has gone mainstream…….