Phoenix condo snapshot for June 2025: how solid are the headline figures?

O

OpenBridge

Seller
If these figures are presented too confidently, the June 2025 snapshot could give a false picture of Phoenix condos. The working numbers are 23 days on market, a 3.1% rise in asking prices and apparent financing pressure near $275,000, but none is firm enough to treat as an index.

Before keeping them, I want to compare completed sales with active and pending listings, then split the results by neighbourhood and price band. Dated sources are welcome, along with clearly identified local observations about inventory or buyer activity.
 
Dropping the 3.1% entirely would also lose potentially useful evidence. I would keep it provisionally, but only after labelling the comparison period and the listing group behind it.

The same condition should apply to the 23 days: state whether it covers active, pending or completed condos. If those definitions cannot be recovered, move both numbers out of the headline and leave them in a notes section.
 
The $275,000 point may partly reflect the mix of properties being counted rather than a clean financing effect. If more lower-priced condos entered the sample in June, both the apparent price movement and time on market could shift. A split by price band and neighbourhood would make the three figures much easier to interpret.
 
Agreed on separating the bands, but I would not discard the headline entirely. Keep it as provisional and show exactly what is missing. That is more useful than waiting for a perfect sample that may never arrive.

A simple table could list active, pending and completed condos separately, then record the date each figure was collected. Any later revision would be visible rather than silently replacing the June snapshot.
 
Also separate condos from other Phoenix property types before adding sale evidence. My suggested next step: label the 23 days and +3.1% as indicative, define the comparison period, create splits below and above $275,000, and add neighbourhood columns only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful. Source links and access dates should sit beside each entry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top