Real Estate Price-to-Income Ratio: 20 Cities Ranked

San Jose’s median home price hit $1,920,000 in Q4 2025 — 22.9 times the metro area’s median household income. That single figure explains more about the US housing market’s fault lines than any narrative about “high demand” or “low inventory.” Across 20 major metros, the spread between the most and least affordable markets runs from a price-to-income ratio of 3.1 in Pittsburgh to 14.1 in San Jose. For a household earning $150,000, that gap translates to the difference between spending 14 cents of every income dollar on housing versus spending more than every dollar you earn.

Key Numbers at a Glance

Why Price-to-Income Ratio Is the Right Filter

Raw home prices mislead. A $580,000 home in Miami and a $580,000 home in Denver are the same sticker price, but the Miami metro’s median household income runs roughly $25,000 lower than Denver’s — making the Miami purchase materially harder to absorb at the same income level. The US city real estate cost comparison that matters is price relative to local earnings power, not absolute price. That’s what the price-to-income ratio (PIR) captures: median home price divided by metro median household income.

The mortgage industry’s front-end debt-to-income ratio (DTI) limit — the percentage of gross income a lender will allow toward principal, interest, taxes, and insurance, known as PITI — sits at 28%. That’s the practical ceiling for most conforming mortgage underwriting. A PIR above roughly 7–8 at current rates pushes even a $150k household’s PITI above that 28% threshold. The markets ranked highest here aren’t just expensive in a vague sense — they are structurally unaffordable by conventional underwriting standards for the majority of $150k+ earners.

For this ranking, I built the analysis using NAR Q4 2025 metro median prices as the primary source, Census Bureau 2024 American Community Survey figures for metro household income, and Lincoln Institute / ATTOM 2024 effective property tax rates. The Finluxy Housing Affordability Index models a $150k gross household, 20% down payment, 6.5% 30-year fixed rate (within Freddie Mac’s 2025 Primary Mortgage Market Survey range of 6.15%–7.04%), 1% annual maintenance, and state-level insurance averages. Markets above 40% on the index are effectively unaffordable for this income level.

The 20-City Ranking: Price-to-Income Ratio and Housing Affordability Index

Sources: NAR Q4 2025 Metropolitan Median Area Prices and Affordability (released Feb. 4, 2026); Redfin Data Center 2025 annual median sale prices; Zillow Home Value Index December 2025; Realtor.com 2025 Monthly Housing Market Trends; Census Bureau ACS 2024 5-year estimates; Lincoln Institute of Land Policy 50-State Property Tax Comparison Study 2024; ATTOM 2024 Property Tax Analysis; Freddie Mac PMMS 2025. Finluxy Housing Affordability Index assumes 20% down, 6.5% 30-year fixed rate, 1% annual maintenance, state-level insurance averages. Metro income figures marked ~approximate are derived from Census ACS metro-area ordering patterns and are not individual 1-year ACS point estimates for those specific metros.

The California Problem Is Worse Than the Headlines Suggest

Four of the five least affordable markets on this list are in California, and the state’s real affordability crisis is less about prices than about the ratio. Los Angeles appears more affordable than San Jose purely on sticker price — $939,700 versus $1,920,000 — but Los Angeles’s metro median household income is roughly $45,000 lower than San Jose’s. That gap makes the PIR for Los Angeles, at 11.1, actually more punishing for median-income residents than San Jose’s 14.8 looks on paper relative to local wages.

The Los Angeles real estate price-to-income reality is that even a $150k household — well above LA’s metro median — spends 50.6% of gross income on PITI and maintenance at the median price. That’s nearly double the conventional 28% front-end DTI limit. A conforming lender typically caps monthly housing at $3,500 for a $150k gross borrower. The monthly PITI on a median LA home at 6.5% runs approximately $6,324. No conventional underwriter approves that loan.

San Francisco sits at 68.8% — still deeply unaffordable for a $150k household, though down from where the Cluster Brief example pegged it at 71% using an earlier $1.3M estimate and 6.8% rate. The current NAR Q4 2025 figure of $1,305,000 with a 6.5% rate produces a slightly different output, and the math still renders San Francisco effectively inaccessible at the $150k income level. The San Francisco vs. Austin total homeownership cost gap is enormous: $8,604 per month against $3,520 — a difference that compounds every year the buyer stays.

The Hidden Unaffordability: Nassau County and Miami

Nassau County, New York at $818,800 and Miami at roughly $580,000 represent a different kind of trap. Both sit at Finluxy Housing Affordability Index levels — 49.8% and 33.1%, respectively — that look more moderate than the California cities. The problem is structural. Nassau County carries a property tax effective rate near 1.5–1.7% (ATTOM 2024 data for Long Island), which inflates the monthly tax component of PITI significantly more than a California home at the same price. Property taxes alone on an $818,800 Nassau County home can run $1,100–$1,300 per month at effective rates — a figure that nearly doubles what a California buyer pays on comparable property.

Miami presents the opposite risk. Its property tax effective rate is relatively low — Florida’s statewide average ran 0.76% in 2024 (ATTOM) — but homeowner insurance in Florida has reached crisis levels. The NAIC data shows Florida homeowners paying among the highest premiums in the country due to hurricane exposure and insurer exits from the market. That insurance cost, not the mortgage or the tax, is the wildcard that most affordability comparisons overlook entirely. For New York City vs. Miami real estate cost, the calculation shifts dramatically once insurance is correctly weighted.

Miami’s PIR of 8.3 is also deceptive in a different direction: the metro median household income sits around $70,000, meaning the median resident — not the $150k earner — faces a PIR that is financially catastrophic. This is a market where $150k earners are the buyers; the median local cannot participate at all.

The Overlooked Insight: Property Tax Regimes Split the “Affordable” Tier

Most coverage of housing affordability stops at PIR or headline mortgage payments. What the data across these 20 cities actually reveals is that property tax structure determines whether a nominally affordable market is genuinely affordable for ownership — and the variation is extreme. Chicago’s effective residential property tax rate ran 1.68% in 2024 (ATTOM), nearly 3.5 times Nashville’s 0.48% and 4.5 times Phoenix’s 0.37%. On a $375,000 Chicago home, that’s approximately $630 per month in taxes versus $226 in Nashville on a $470,000 home. Nashville is a more expensive purchase by $95,000, yet the property tax bill runs $400/month lower. The how property tax varies across US metro areas analysis matters more to total monthly cost than most buyers realize at the offer stage.

Detroit is the extreme case in both directions. Its Finluxy Housing Affordability Index of 14.6% looks like a bargain — and for a $150k earner, the monthly outlay of $1,821 is genuinely manageable. But Detroit’s effective property tax rate is among the highest in the Lincoln Institute’s 2024 study, running at more than twice the national city average of 1.22%. On a $200,000 home, that produces roughly $500/month in taxes — a larger tax-to-price ratio than any California market in this dataset. The most affordable luxury markets for $150k earners analysis shows Detroit ranks well on payment, but the structural tax burden erodes the appeal for buyers expecting to hold through appreciation.

Dallas carries a similar friction. Its headline PIR looks attractive at 4.9, among the lowest in the ranking. But Texas’s property tax regime — with effective rates near 1.6–1.8% — adds roughly $671/month in taxes to a $395,000 purchase. That pushes the total monthly cost above Nashville despite Nashville’s higher sticker price. The Sun Belt cities real estate cost benchmarks that exclude tax burdens give a distorted picture.

The Finluxy Housing Affordability Index: Full Breakdown

The Finluxy Housing Affordability Index expresses monthly PITI (principal, interest, taxes, and insurance — where PITI stands for all four components of a fully-loaded mortgage payment) plus maintenance as a percentage of gross monthly income for a $150,000/year household. That works out to $12,500 gross per month. The mortgage industry’s front-end DTI benchmark is 28%; markets above 40% are effectively unaffordable for this income level.

The index confirms four clear tiers. Tier one — effectively unaffordable above 40%: San Jose (100.1%), San Francisco (68.8%), San Diego (53.4%), Los Angeles (50.6%), Seattle (48.0%), and Nassau County (49.8%). Every one of these markets exceeds the 40% threshold, meaning even a $150k household cannot meet conventional front-end DTI requirements at the median price. Tier two — strained between 30–40%: Boston (37.5%), New York City (37.3%), Miami (33.1%), and Denver (30.4%). A $150k household can potentially qualify here, but is housing-cost-burdened by HUD’s 30% threshold the moment they close.

Tier three — feasible between 20–30%: Austin (28.2%), Dallas (25.6%), Nashville (25.2%), Chicago (23.9%), Phoenix (22.7%), Charlotte (21.5%), Atlanta (22.3%), and Minneapolis (21.0%). These markets allow meaningful budget flexibility at $150k income. Tier four — genuinely comfortable below 20%: Pittsburgh (14.3%) and Detroit (14.6%).

Source: Finluxy calculations using NAR Q4 2025 median prices, Census ACS 2024 metro household income, Lincoln Institute / ATTOM 2024 effective property tax rates, Freddie Mac PMMS 2025 rate range. $150k household = $12,500 gross monthly income. Down payment: 20%. Rate: 6.5% 30-year fixed.

Regional Divergence: What the Data Shows About Sun Belt vs. Northeast vs. Rust Belt

The Chicago vs. Washington D.C. homeownership cost gap illustrates how the Midwest’s low sticker prices are partially offset by tax burden, while DC’s higher price is cushioned by an above-average metro income of $126,684 (Census ACS 2024). Washington D.C. doesn’t appear in this 20-city table directly because the Zillow December 2025 estimate of roughly $600,000 puts its PIR near 4.7 — better than many coastal markets despite the price — though its affordability index for a $150k household still runs above 30% once PITI is fully loaded.

Boston’s index of 37.5% looks harsh, but Boston benefits from two structural advantages: a metro median income near $115,863 (Census ACS 2024, among the highest in the country), and one of the lowest effective property tax rates in the Lincoln Institute’s 2024 study. The Boston vs. Philadelphia real estate cost comparison would likely favor Philadelphia substantially on PIR, though Boston’s tax structure makes its total ownership cost more manageable than its sticker price suggests. The $285/month property tax estimate on a $713,000 Boston home — derived from the Lincoln Institute’s finding that Boston’s effective rate is below half the study average of 1.22%, placing it near 0.5% — is a significant advantage over comparable-priced markets.

The Sun Belt correction is visible but should not be overstated. Miami (-4.3% year-over-year per Zillow January 2026), Austin (down 6.0% per Zillow November 2025), and Nashville (-3.5% year-over-year per Realtor.com July 2025) all declined in 2025. Yet even corrected, Miami’s PIR of 8.3 relative to its local metro income remains one of the most punishing in the group. The Denver vs. Phoenix housing cost and income reality shows Phoenix as the better value: a PIR of 5.7 versus Denver’s 6.4, with a lower property tax rate (0.37% vs. approximately 0.5%) and comparable income levels.

What This Means for the $150k+ Household

A $150,000 income is roughly 1.8x the US median household income of $83,730 (Census Bureau 2024 Current Population Survey). In California’s coastal markets, that premium earns a household almost nothing in practical buying power at the median price. The six markets where the Finluxy Housing Affordability Index exceeds 40% are not borderline cases — they are structurally locked for anyone financing at conventional terms and targeting the median home. To buy at the median in San Francisco at a $150k income, a buyer would need to put roughly 50% down to get payments into the 28% front-end DTI zone. That’s a $652,500 down payment on a $1.305M home.

The more actionable observation from this dataset is what happens in the 20–30% tier. Austin at 28.2%, Nashville at 25.2%, and Dallas at 25.6% are within a $150k household’s reach — but the property tax profiles diverge sharply. Nashville’s 0.48% effective rate (ATTOM 2024) makes it the more efficient ownership market of the three. Austin’s Texas property tax effective rate near 1.6% turns a $450,000 purchase into a monthly tax bill around $600 — closing the gap with Nashville’s higher sticker price considerably. Nashville real estate market costs and benchmarks show it as arguably the most efficient Sun Belt market on total monthly cost for a $150k household once taxes are included.

For the household considering relocation, the PIR alone understates the full picture. The question isn’t only “where is the home affordable?” but “where does the income go furthest after housing?” Pittsburgh’s 14.3% index leaves $10,714 per month — roughly $128,000 per year — available after housing costs at $150k gross income. Even after taxes and living costs, that margin supports meaningful retirement savings and investment. The monthly cost of owning in each major US city frames this as a total household financial picture, not a standalone housing decision.

One threshold worth holding in mind: the six markets above 40% on the index will not become conventionally affordable for $150k households unless prices fall dramatically, rates drop well below 5%, or incomes rise faster than the past decade’s trajectory suggests. That’s not pessimism — it’s what the numbers show. Buyers in those markets typically bring family equity, dual incomes above $250k combined, or disproportionately large down payments. A $150k single-income household targeting San Jose at the median is not a competitive buyer in any conventional sense. The price-to-income ratio at $100k where buying still makes sense shrinks that map considerably further.