A truly national property market downturn has not happened in this country for more than 90 years. It most definitely is not happening right now. And it is unlikely that Australia will experience it ever again.
We have to go all the way back to the Great Depressions of the mid-1930’s for the last time home values were declining in locations all over Australia.
Back then, banks were grossly undercapitalised, buyers required a minimum deposit of 30 percent, households had single incomes, unemployment was 25 percent, and it was a well before globalisation and digital economies.
For everyone to be surprised to have just read that ‘national’ property market downturns are fictitious in modern Australia merely illustrates the (forever) problem of very poor-quality real estate reporting in this country.
Unfortunately, the Australian public is consistently misled by big profile national property data companies who make irresponsible sweeping statements, conduct fingernail deep analysis, and create unnecessarily harmful headlines.
Let’s be clear, it is no more important for a resident of Sydney to be properly informed about property market conditions in their hometown than it is for a resident of Shepparton VIC, Sunshine Coast QLD, Strathalbyn SA, South Hedland WA, St Helens TAS or Shoalhaven NSW.
But that does not happen!
The current fake news about a ‘national downturn’ is not an isolated situation. It happens every single time real estate values decline in Sydney and Melbourne, as illustrated in the graphic below.
Research insights: SUBSCRIBE HERE
The changing macro events in each of the six (6) periods in the above chart had a bigger impact in the cities with the highest average household mortgages.
Sydney and Melbourne typically saw a dip in home values during the recession in the early 1990s, during multiple periods of significant interest rate spikes, during the post-GFC stimulus wind-back, when the credit regulator lost its lollies and again right now.
During those same six periods, numerous other parts of this large and very diverse country produced growth in real estate values.
Yet the Australian public were needlessly misled with fictitious reports about a ‘national’ property market downturn.
The red columns (Sydney and Melbourne) were generally below the horizontal, whereas a majority of the green columns (the other capital cities) and the blue columns (regional cities from different states) reflect capital growth, including double-digit growth.
Related article: Property markets over last quarter-of-a-century
Blind Freddy can see it
Anyone with half a brain who looks at a list of numbers in a spreadsheet will see, in literally every year, there is always a large variation in property market performance from one city to another.
So, why isn’t the Australian public provided with accurate information?
Imagine if those employed in the role to publish nationwide real estate commentary lived in Albury, Bendigo, Dubbo, Launceston or Toowoomba, instead of Sydney or Melbourne.
I wonder how they would feel every time the nonsensical ‘national’ narrative contradicts the reality of property market conditions in their hometown?
Devil in the data table detail
Make no mistake, there is no such thing as a ‘national property market’.
On or about the first day of each month, property data is parcelled up by a few different prominent national companies. The various media outlets then produce news content from the information supplied.
From the stories that the public reads each month, everyone will be familiar with the typical graphic that contains data for the change in median property values over the previous month, quarter and year [examples below].
Problem Number 1
Measuring market performance from the median price of last months’ sales in a chosen jurisdiction creates a significant data integrity risk. Unlike shares in the stockmarket, properties typically only change hands every 7 to 10 years. So, the volume of real estate transactions within a monthly period is a very small sample size of just 0.4 percent of the total dwelling volume. A bigger critical mass of transactions and more reliable reading is achieved with a rolling quarterly change in values.
Quarterly real estate reports published recently for the period ending June 2026 contained data which suggested property values fell in three (3) cities.
Just 3 locations among the 6th largest country on the planet.
The same reports also contain data showing asset values in 2 of those same 3 cities to be worth more today than this time last year.
Yes, more!
So, the reality is this:
- just one (1) of the 8 cities listed in the report saw a decline in asset values over the last 12-months….
- that ‘decline’ was a piddly 0.4 percent,
- the public were kept in the dark about conditions across the rest of Australia,
- in the Q2 2026 quarter, the change in house values for 95 percent of the 400+ cities and towns nationwide ranged between 0 and 4 percent growth (yes ‘growth’), and yet
- every media bulletin ran with the “NATIONAL DOWNTURN” narrative.
Problem Number 2
Describing the report as a ‘national’ publication when it contains the results of only 8 cities is bordering on professional negligence. The report ignores 17 Australian cities that have a population of 100,000 or more, along with 400+ other important cities and townships.
Call it what it is: a ‘Capital City Report.’ Instead of misleading the public, openly admit that the households of 10 million Australians have been ignored.
Problem Number 3
Throwing a blanket over an entire state’s regional communities, referring to them as ‘Rest of State’ or ‘Combined Regions’ and giving them the same ‘average’ rate of change is both disrespectful and pointless.
For example, reporting ‘Rest of NSW’ as having 7 percent growth over the last 12-months is not helpful to people with interest in Port Macquarie (5 percent), Maitland (17 Percent) and Armidale (20 percent) and Wagga Wagga (24 percent).
Similar variations occur in every state in almost every reporting period.
Problem Number 4
Of the hundreds of information sources which Propertyology collates intel from, auction data is the least useful, because the data represents a very small volume of transactions.
While the auction method of sale is more common in Sydney and Melbourne than elsewhere, it still represents only 20 and 25 percent of all properties sold (even less when local conditions are soft). In Brisbane, circa 15 percent of sales are via auction. And it’s between 5 and 10 percent in most of the rest of Australia.
Ditch the ‘data boxes’
It is not possible for anyone to buy a parcel of the ‘national real estate index’ or the ‘combined regions index’.
So, cease publishing data for something which does not exist.
It is seriously stupid to bundle up Byron, Broken Hill and Bowral (all in regional NSW) and suggest their respective property markets are in unison.
Ditto for Noosa with Normanton (regional Queensland), Broome with Bunbury (regional WA), and Wangaratta with Warrnambool (regional Victoria).
The quality of the messaging delivered to the community must improve – significantly.
Real estate reporting companies have a social responsibility to ensure that statistical information which they publish is accurate and that (misleading) broadbrush statements and generalisations are not made.
The general public also owe it to themselves to refrain from accepting everything that one sees and hears as gospel.
What’s really happening?
It is true that buyer activity in most locations eased directly after the property tax raid announcements in the Federal Budget on May 12.
But the impact is confined largely to sentiment (mind fog), as opposed to a fracture to fundamentals.
Yes, Sydney is currently experiencing a challenging period (which it will recover from).
And Melbourne’s woes are nothing new. It has been the worst performed property market out of 400+ townships in Australia for the last 8-years.
But there’s a very solid floor under the value of Australian homes.
Underpinning market strength in large parts of Australia is the long-running dire shortage of properties listed for sale.
A large majority of locations across Australia are still enjoying very strong local economies, they boast handsome levels of household equity, construction activity remains sub-par, and multiple buyers are competing for property like seagulls fighting over a chip.
A suite of compelling statistical evidence of UPWARD pressure on asset values in umpteen cities across Australia is outlined in this recent research report by Propertyology.
Australians have good reason to remain confident about the future value of their biggest asset.
The most significant problem which is destined to implode very soon is the deepening drought of rental properties. Watch this space.
Propertyology are national buyer’s agents and Australia’s premier property market analyst. Every capital city and every non-capital city, Propertyology analyse fundamentals in every market, every day. We use this valuable research to help everyday Aussies to invest in strategically-chosen locations (literally) all over Australia. Like to know more? Contact us here.
Here’s how we combine our thought-leading research with Propertyology’s award-winning buyer’s agency services.
