Home Insurance by State: Premium Comparison Data

The average U.S. homeowner spent $1,559 on insurance in 2022 — the most recent year the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) has validated nationally, published in its May 2025 report. That figure rose 10.5% from 2021, per the Insurance Research Council (IRC). It is also nearly useless to anyone insuring a home above $1 million, because the gap between what the median household pays and what a coastal high-value owner pays has stopped being a difference of degree. It is now a difference of kind.

State-by-state premium data gets quoted constantly and understood rarely. Part of the problem is that “average premium” means at least three different things depending on who published it, and the numbers diverge by thousands of dollars for the same state. This analysis separates the primary government-validated figures from the modeled aggregator quotes, then applies a replacement-cost lens — the only one that matters for a $150k+ household whose home costs far more to rebuild than the national median.

The numbers that actually carry a source

Start with what a government body has validated. The NAIC’s homeowners report — collected from statistical agents in every state except Texas and California, which report directly through their insurance departments — pegged the 2022 national average HO-3 expenditure at $1,559. The IRC, using that NAIC data against Census Bureau median income, found the average household spent 2.09% of income on homeowners insurance in 2022, matching the prior peak set in 2014.

Sources: NAIC Homeowners Insurance Report (2022 data); Insurance Research Council, “Homeowners Insurance Affordability” (2022 base); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (2023); LendingTree and Insure.com 2026 state analyses.

Notice the spread in that last row. The validated NAIC expenditure and the modeled 2026 aggregator quotes differ by roughly $800–$1,000, and they are not measuring the same thing. NAIC expenditure is actual premium divided by exposure across all policy amounts. Aggregator quotes — from Quadrant Information Services data used by LendingTree, Insurify, and Insure.com — fix the inputs: $300,000 in dwelling coverage, $1,000 deductible, good credit, a 1980 build. rebuilding cost versus market value explains why that fixed $300k assumption breaks down the moment you cross into high-value territory.

Where the highest and lowest premiums land

Three primary and near-primary sources agree on the geography even when they disagree on the dollar amounts. The Census Bureau’s 2023 figures for mortgaged homes put Florida highest at a $2,273 median, followed by Louisiana ($2,140) and Oklahoma ($2,041). The IRC’s affordability index — premium as a share of income — ranked Louisiana least affordable in 2022 at 4.22%, with Florida, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Arkansas completing the bottom five. Utah sat most affordable at 1.00%.

Modeled 2026 data tells a similar story with bigger numbers and some reshuffling at the top, because aggregators capture rate increases the validated data hasn’t caught up to yet.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau ACS (2023); Insurance Research Council (2022); LendingTree “State of Home Insurance: 2026”; Insurance.com (March 2026). Modeled figures use $300k dwelling, $1,000 deductible assumptions and vary by provider methodology.

The Florida figure deserves a flag. Insurance.com’s 2026 model shows $7,136 while noting rates there are stabilizing; LendingTree’s same-year data shows Florida’s 2025 increase at just 0.4%, the smallest in the nation, after Citizens Property Insurance shed more than a million policies back to the private market following 2022–2023 reforms. The headline number is high and decelerating at the same time — a distinction most state-ranking coverage flattens into a single scary figure. The Florida home insurance cost crisis is real, but the trend line bent in 2024.

Why the same state shows four different averages

A homeowner who searches “average premium Florida” will find $2,273, $5,735, $7,136, and $10,240 depending on the source, all published within roughly a year of each other. None is wrong. They answer different questions.

The Census Bureau measures what mortgaged households actually report paying, blended across all home values including modest ones, and including owners who carry minimal coverage. Aggregators model a standardized policy — Bankrate uses an eight-year-old $300,000 home with clean claims and good credit; MoneyGeek and Insurance.com use similar fixed profiles. When a model assumes $300k of dwelling coverage in a state where the median home costs far more to rebuild, it understates the bill for an actual buyer and overstates comparability across states with different housing stock. The methodology footnote is the whole story, and it is the part readers skip.

There is also a residual-market distortion. NAIC’s validated figures include policies written by state-backed insurers of last resort — Florida’s Citizens, Louisiana Citizens — and some wind pools. Texas premiums run artificially high in the data because the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association classifies several policy forms as HO-3. Cross-state ranking without reading those notes produces confident, wrong conclusions.

The Finluxy Home Insurance Cost Rate

Premium-by-state tables are built for a $350,000 house. For a household insuring a $1.5M–$3M property, the more useful figure is premium as a percentage of insured replacement cost — what this analysis calls the Finluxy Home Insurance Cost Rate (annual total homeowner premium across all policies ÷ insured replacement cost × 100). The national benchmark runs 0.50–1.2%. In Florida and coastal California, high-value owners see 2–4%+.

I built the profiles below from the high-value rate benchmark coastal specialists were quoting for 2025 — roughly $0.41 per $100 of total insured value as a baseline, climbing steeply in catastrophe-exposed markets — cross-checked against the ~$7,400–$7,500 national average that several brokers cite for a $1M dwelling. Where a state-specific high-value actual was unavailable from a primary source, the rate is modeled and labeled as such.

Sources: Coastal Insurance Solution 2025 high-value benchmark ($0.41 per $100 TIV; $1M dwelling ≈ $7,412); Finluxy modeled scenarios. The NY-metro row uses total insured value (dwelling + contents + other structures), which lowers the percentage against a larger base. Hard-market Miami figure reflects coastal high-value conditions and is illustrative, not a quoted policy.

The pattern is the part that gets overlooked. The rate is not a smooth function of home value — it is a function of geography. A $2.75M home in a stable Northeast market can carry a lower cost rate than a $350k house in tornado-belt Oklahoma, because the Oklahoma home sits in a higher-frequency peril zone. Coverage amount sets the dollar bill; location sets the rate. Anyone budgeting from a national “percentage of home value” rule of thumb will be wrong in both directions depending on their ZIP code. The mechanics of pricing a multimillion-dollar property are unpacked further in cost to insure a $3M home.

What the hard markets actually cost

California and Florida are where state averages stop describing reality for high-value owners. State Farm non-renewed roughly 30,000 California policies in 2024 citing wildfire and earthquake-fire exposure, more than 1,600 of them in Pacific Palisades months before the January 2025 fires. By September 2025, insurers had paid over $20 billion on roughly 40,000 Los Angeles wildfire claims. When an admitted high-value carrier declines a home, the fallback is the California FAIR Plan — Fair Access to Insurance Requirements — which caps residential dwelling coverage at $3 million and covers fire and limited perils only, paired with a Difference in Conditions wrap policy to restore liability, theft, and water coverage.

The carriers still writing these homes apply their own wildfire scores and value thresholds. Chubb’s Masterpiece program targets dwellings of roughly $1.5M and up; Pure Insurance typically writes $1M to $2M+; AIG Private Client serves high-net-worth clients on a bundled basis. Pricing diverges sharply by carrier — Chubb quotes near $3,958 for $500,000 in dwelling coverage, about 10% above the national average per Insurify, and runs considerably higher than Pure for the same risk. The comparison among Chubb, Pure, and AIG high-value insurance matters more in hard markets than anywhere else, because availability, not just price, is the constraint. What the last-resort option costs is detailed in FAIR Plan coverage cost, and the wildfire-specific market is covered in California wildfire insurance availability.

The components behind a single premium

State comparison tables collapse a stack of separately priced coverages into one number. For a high-value household, the dwelling coverage premium is only the base layer. On top of it sit personal property coverage, scheduled personal property endorsements for high-value items, liability coverage, and frequently an allocated share of an umbrella policy.

A scheduled personal property endorsement — an add-on, often called a rider, that itemizes and insures specific high-value possessions above standard sub-limits — is where jewelry, art, and collections get covered for their full appraised value. Standard policies cap these categories low. The scheduled personal property endorsement cost scales with the appraised value of what’s listed, and for jewelry and art rider cost the rate per insured dollar varies by category and storage. Liability sits separately again; Chubb writes up to $100 million in liability, far beyond mass-market limits, and an umbrella policy for high-value homeowners extends it further for a marginal annual cost that is small relative to the asset it protects. Flood is its own policy entirely — the tradeoffs between NFIP and private flood insurance determine whether coastal coverage is even economical.

Methodology

What this means for a $150k+ household

For a household at this income insuring a home well above the national median, the state-average tables circulating online are the wrong instrument. They are calibrated to a $300,000–$350,000 house, and they understate both the dollar bill and — critically — they tell you nothing about the cost rate that determines whether your premium is reasonable for your specific location and replacement cost. The decision is not which state is “cheapest.” It is whether your total annual cost across dwelling, scheduled property, liability, umbrella, and flood divided by your true replacement cost lands inside the 0.50–1.2% national band or pushes toward the 2–4% hard-market range, and if it does, whether that reflects unavoidable catastrophe exposure or a carrier you’ve simply outgrown.

The actionable threshold for this income bracket is the $1M-plus replacement cost mark, where mass-market HO-3 coverage begins to fail — sub-limits on jewelry and art bite, dwelling replacement caps fall short of true rebuild cost, and non-renewal risk in catastrophe states rises. At that point the relevant comparison stops being state-versus-state and becomes carrier-versus-carrier among high-value specialists, where a Chubb, Pure, or AIG Private Client quote for the same risk can differ by thousands and where, in California or Florida, the binding question is availability before price. Running your own Finluxy Home Insurance Cost Rate annually — and treating any figure outside the national band as a prompt to re-shop or re-appraise rather than a fact to accept — is the discipline that separates an informed renewal from an automatic one. A high-value insurance broker who works the surplus-lines and FAIR Plan markets is worth consulting before a renewal in a hard-market state, because by the time a non-renewal notice arrives, the options have already narrowed.