By Vanguard Staff
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Homeownership in the Sacramento region has climbed to its highest level in nearly four decades, even as affordability challenges and longstanding disparities continue to limit access for many households.
A recent analysis of 2024 American Community Survey data found that nearly 64 percent of households in the six-county Sacramento region are owner-occupied, the highest rate recorded since 1980.
According to the report by SACOG, “homeownership reaching the highest rates in nearly 40 years,” highlighting both the scale of the increase and its historical significance.
The increase comes despite rising housing costs, higher interest rates and broader economic headwinds that have made it more difficult for many households to purchase homes. Regional analysts point to continued migration from higher-cost regions and increased housing production as contributing factors to the sustained growth in ownership.
Unlike statewide and national trends, where homeownership rates plateaued around 2021, the Sacramento region has continued to see year-over-year increases in ownership levels in recent years.
Homeownership has long been considered a key pathway to building wealth, offering benefits such as equity accumulation, price stability for households with fixed-rate mortgages and the potential for long-term appreciation.
But the data also underscore the limits of that narrative, particularly in a region where affordability remains a significant barrier and access to homeownership remains uneven.
More than 70 percent of households in the region are priced out of the new-home market, according to reporting cited in the SACOG analysis, underscoring the growing disconnect between housing costs and household incomes.
That tension is reinforced by broader findings in the 2025 SACOG Regional Progress Report, which documents both gains in housing production and persistent affordability challenges across the region.
The report found that more than 12,500 housing units were completed in 2024, representing a near two-decade high in new construction.
At the same time, the region continues to grapple with a housing shortage that has developed over decades, raising questions about whether recent gains in production will be enough to meet long-term demand.
Housing costs remain high relative to incomes. The typical home value in the Sacramento region is around $600,000, while average rents exceed $2,300 per month, placing the region among the most expensive midsized housing markets in the country.
Even with some moderation in price growth since 2022, the gap between housing costs and income remains significant. The ratio of home values to income, which rose sharply over the past decade, remains well above levels typically considered affordable.
As a result, a large share of households are struggling to keep up with housing costs. The report found that well over one-third of households in the region are considered housing cost burdened, meaning they spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing.
The burden is especially acute for renters, more than half of whom are cost burdened, compared to a much lower share of homeowners.
At the same time, the data highlight persistent racial and ethnic disparities in both homeownership and housing cost burdens.
Historical practices such as redlining and discriminatory lending have limited access to homeownership for many families of color, contributing to long-standing gaps that remain evident today.
The latest data show that, while some groups have seen modest gains over time, Black households in particular continue to have significantly lower homeownership rates, and the gap may have widened in recent years.
These disparities extend beyond ownership rates to broader housing outcomes. Black and Hispanic households are more likely to be housing cost burdened, reflecting both lower rates of homeownership and broader income inequalities.
Despite these challenges, the region has made measurable progress in increasing housing supply and diversifying the types of housing being built.
Recent years have seen record levels of attached housing, including apartments and townhomes, as well as a surge in accessory dwelling units, which have increased dramatically since policy changes were enacted to encourage their development.
The region has also made progress toward building more housing in infill areas, with roughly two-thirds of new housing in the past five years located in established communities and corridors, aligning with long-term regional planning goals.
Still, analysts caution that current production levels remain insufficient to fully address the scale of the housing shortage, particularly for lower-income households.
While there has been an increase in housing serving low- and very low-income residents in recent years, those units still represent a small share of overall production.
As a result, many households remain priced out of both homeownership and rental markets, limiting the broader benefits of rising homeownership rates.
The latest data present a mixed picture for the Sacramento region: a notable increase in homeownership rates that suggests some progress, alongside persistent affordability challenges and structural inequities that continue to shape who can access housing and build wealth.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
“Homeownership has long been considered a key pathway to building wealth, offering benefits such as equity accumulation, price stability for households with fixed-rate mortgages and the potential for long-term appreciation.”
I’m confused – isn’t “building wealth” and “equity accumulation” THE problem regarding affordability in the first place?
How can one advocate for wealth building via homeownership, while also complaining about the result?
“I’m confused – isn’t “building wealth” and “equity accumulation” THE problem in the first place?”
No
O.K. – then you have no problem with resulting “affordability” for those moving to the area, and/or don’t already own homes.
Pick a lane. You can’t accumulate equity unless prices are rising (other than what you directly pay off in principal).
Disagree that the choices are binary
The “choices” are literally binary. It’s simple math.
If housing prices aren’t rising, the only equity you have is what you pay off in principal. (Actually, you don’t even have that due to real estate transaction fees. Prices have to rise just to “break even”.)
Of course, if you “break even” you might come out ahead due to not having to pay rent (which usually contains at least some profit margin).
Then again, you’ll be paying taxes, insurance, etc., as a homeowner.
Range of housing options
The math applies to all ranges of housing options.
If prices aren’t rising, you’re not building equity other than what you yourself pay off in principal.
But if prices are rising, you’re increasing unaffordability across the range of housing options.
Do you actually not understand that – since I’ve pointed it out several times at this point? This isn’t an “opinion” – it’s simple math.
The answer to affordability is not to limit wealth, it’s to provide more supply and a range of supply Economics 101.
And I will add the main problem is that wealth is accumulated so unequally that you have very rich and very poor and people who are living month to month.
“The answer to affordability is not to limit wealth, it’s to provide more supply and a range of supply Economics 101.”
So if you provide more “supply”, Economics 101 tells you that equity won’t be built (since prices won’t rise, all else being equal).
Rising home prices is a good thing unless it’s a bad thing.
Do I have that about right?
No
Yes