Total Available Market - 2, 3, and 4 units

Total Available Market - 2, 3, and 4 units

Investor · Willow Spring, NC · Member since 2009 · 5k+ posts · 3k+ votes

This post is specific to the Raleigh area, but the methodology is applicable to many other cities and counties in NC. 

In the Raleigh area many people, especially from out of state moving into the Raleigh area, post about wanting to by a quad, a 4 unit building. Often the posts refer to wanting a 'small multifamily' which, over time I have learned, translates for them to property financed as a traditionally underwritten 1-4 Family, owner occupied dwelling. 

The concept is sound: live in one unit and rent the rest. It's a great idea, assuming you can find a 2-4 unit that makes financial sense. 

The purpose of this post is to identify the Total Available Market (TAM) for all these asset classes, where the current owners are located, what year the units were built, and to see if it is possible to glean any market dynamics from the data. Data sources can be any or multiple of these: MLS (work with a broker), Zillow data services, realtyTrac, your local AHJ (Authority Having Jurisdiction) or county records group, a title company with in-house county property records, companies like coreLogic, eStated, trustee records, etc. Disclaimer: I haven't worked with many of these data sources for over 5 years now but many of them had similar data sets and several had APIs that were reasonable. Some were reasonably priced, some free(see note *), some expensive. I suspect most people will use MLS queries and you will (should) get the same results as in this post. For me, though, I use the low tech, no amenities interfaces from county data dumps because I am old school. To each his own. 

When you get your TAM report from your broker or via your data search, you should see something similar to one of these graphs: 

My graphs are based on public records, not MLS or Zdata, so there may be some discrepancy in your graphs. The takeaway here is that there are almost no new build quads or tris in the last 30 years, and there are a few dozen (at most) duplexes built in the past 30 years. So that's your TAM. Using simple ratios of 2-4 units relative to all Residential property, here's the result:

Type

% of Residential
Single Family

97.2
Duplex

0.74
Tri

0.13
Quad

0.15
Other

the rest

The Wake county Quad market consists of 95% in Raleigh, 5% not in Raleigh. The Owners of these quads consist of 91.5% owner of record addresses in NC, 2.5% in CA, 1.9% in NY. The Wake county duplex market consists of 71.5% in Raleigh, 8.7% in Cary, 4.0% in Wake Forest, 3.5% in Zebulon, 3.4% in Garner, other cities the rest. Owners of duplexes, like quads, are mostly NC at 93.7%, with CA and GA (1.8%, 0.7% respectively) followed by smaller percentages in other states. 

One significant item to note is that the "Other" category will include apartments (garden, rooming house, etc.) that will have one entry as far as the count, but the property record will have multiple cards that represent the individual units. So it is not the case that less than 2% of Residential units are apartments, in fact the count is higher. Quads (and duplexes and tris) are classified so that each unit is, basically, single carded as a unique real estate ID, so my counts don't need to consider separate cards. When you undertake analysis in other markets, keep this in mind because not all counties handle records the same way (hence, you need to normalize the data.)  

I had hoped to cover counts of 'transfers', units sold by type, but the data I'm seeing doesn't make sense to me at the moment. I will post when I have confidence the sales data reflect reality. In a nut shell, the numbers look too high. I looked at a couple of them and they were not arms-length transfers, so I need to get the 'real' sales. More later....


Methodology: TAM built only on Residential Land Classification with Type and Use of Two, Three, or Four Family. Searches consist of TAM counts, Year Built field annualized, Owner address (which state) in public record, location based on Physical City field. Queries are based on 6/1/19 datasets, so some results (e.g. ownership state) will change over time. 


Notes (*): The bigger counties (Mecklenburg , New Hanover, Wake, others) provide raw data and for some smaller counties you can download the data, indirectly, from the GIS user interface. In Columbus county, for instance, this is the case and there is a download button from the parcel GIS viewer. 
7Reply
30 views

Most Popular Reply

Raleigh, NC · Member since 2017 · 347 posts · 94 votes
7y

@Chris Martin nicely done. Yep that was my methodology when I first moved here but it has changed based on supply.

It probably doesn't make sense to build many small multi when sfh in downtown Raleigh are selling for 400/500k+. Ain't no way are duplex etc gonna get anywhere close to 1% or a "decent" cash flow when you buy just the lot for 150k. And new construction is way over $100/sqft

See this reply in the discussion

5 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Raleigh, NC · Member since 2017 · 347 posts · 94 votes
    7y

    @Chris Martin nicely done. Yep that was my methodology when I first moved here but it has changed based on supply.

    It probably doesn't make sense to build many small multi when sfh in downtown Raleigh are selling for 400/500k+. Ain't no way are duplex etc gonna get anywhere close to 1% or a "decent" cash flow when you buy just the lot for 150k. And new construction is way over $100/sqft

  • Investor · Willow Spring, NC · Member since 2009 · 5k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Chris C.:

    @Chris Martin nicely done. Yep that was my methodology when I first moved here but it has changed based on supply.

    It probably doesn't make sense to build many small multi when sfh in downtown Raleigh are selling for 400/500k+. Ain't no way are duplex etc gonna get anywhere close to 1% or a "decent" cash flow when you buy just the lot for 150k. And new construction is way over $100/sqft

    I agree with your conclusion in theory. I randomly looked at just one duplex in the newer build class (2017) and it sold for $202/sq.ft. ($619K/3060 sq.ft.) It is an infill project near NCSU. The quarter acre lot is/was $75K assessed that sold for $80K. I assume a 10% builder margin, thus the build cost (sans lot) is $156/sq.ft. which sounds plausible.

    lot: $80K
    profit: $62K
    build: $477K or $156 /sqft

    This property sold to a CA buyer for $619K. Unit is encumbered with conventional, 1-4 Family Rider, $464K loan. While I would not purchase this property because rents would struggle to cover the loan and tax burden, others (e.g. CA buyers) will and do. Some buyers are 'parking' money in real estate they hope will be break even cash flow-wise, provide depreciation losses tax-wise, and potentially have some upside appreciation-wise. I've seen this in multiple asset classes over the past few years.

    The question for me becomes: is developing a 2-4 family property an opportunity? I'm not a builder, just observing what the data presents. If a builder can get $202 per square foot for a duplex in Raleigh, the question I have is are builders selling SFR for $202 / sq.ft.? More? Less? Maybe the motivating answer is in builder margin instead. While this build was not Toll Brothers, for FY2018, the Average delivered price (sample size=1247) for a Toll Brothers SFR in the south region was $741,000 but I don't know the average square footage. Gross Margins were better than 10%, but TB develops subdivisions with more efficient operations than an infill project. 

    I don't have time to build queries at the moment, but I'd like to know when the CA buyers purchased their property. My guess is most bought in the past 3 years, but it's just a guess.

  • Real Estate Broker · Asheville, NC · Member since 2016 · 138 posts · 63 votes
    7y

    Another great breakdown.

  • Specialist · Cleveland, OH · Member since 2018 · 232 posts · 348 votes
    7y

    @Chris Martin very interesting analysis.

    I love these types of analytical discussions so I decided to take a look at the data myself!

    Was interested to see if your assertion that CA buyers are more likely to 'park' money into properties held up against the relevant data.  Interestingly enough I found that Californian are not paying any more for 2 to 4 unit buildings than local investors are on average. I found this by first normalizing the purchase price by number of units in the property, giving me a price paid per unit figure. Then I aggregated by year sold. 

    As for whether or not a builder can get $202 per sq ft on a SFR, I found that it is not the case. Over the past decade prices per sq ft on new construction SFR have gone up measurably, but it does not seem like $200/sqft has been reached in the Raleigh market.

    Your guess as to when CA buyers purchased their properties is correct. The past 3 years account for a large percentage of 2 - 4 unit buildings procured by Californians. There was also a notable, yet predictable spike before the 08 crash. 

    Lastly, here is map with drop pins for all the 2 - 4 unit buildings purchased by Californians with corresponding location grades. Seems like most are located in B/C areas with the notable cluster located in a D area. This, I would argue, reinforces the assertion that Californians are in fact looking to invest in real estate for cash flow, not just as a wealth preservation vehicle. 

    Let me know if you any thoughts 

  • Investor · Willow Spring, NC · Member since 2009 · 5k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    7y

    @Art Perkitny Quite excellent!

    With not a lot of data, but probably enough, it seems to me that the 2-4 unit sales, per square feet, for recently built new construction fetch a modest premium to newly built SFR. One of the complications I run into with sales data is often there are transactions that are disqualified sales, or not arms-length transactions, or transfers that otherwise don't make sense. If I can find these, and the easiest way is to look for a zero or minimal transaction consideration, I try to remove them from the results.

    This graph is transfer price per sq. ft. for duplexes, built 2000 and after, with consideration (arms length transaction), sorted by date of sale, excluding the 8 goofy transactions on 2012-12-10. Transactions this year (2019) are $150-$200 per square foot. It may be that this is just an aberration, but trends start somewhere. I think there is a case for building in a market characterized by scare products like 2-4 family in Wake county, with historically higher demand than SFR, where margins may make for an opportunity worth pursuing. 

    Ultimately, I look for (or try to build) a 'call to action', which would be an answer for 'what am I going to do with the data?'
    What I'm trying to figure out if this is a space I really want to be in or if I run data on a few other of my hunches based on observing the local market.

    Great post. It's good to see data centric, medium/big picture views of the local market.

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.