2018 03-2018 pain-and_gain_report_march

Pain and Gain
December Quarter, 2017
A quarterly assessment of realised gross profit and loss based on
dwelling re-sales over the December Quarter of 2017

Executive Summary 3
National overview 4
Houses vs units 7
Focus on major capital city houses and units 7
Suburbs with the highest share of resales at a loss 8
Investor vs owner occupier resales 9
Hold periods 10
Focus on regional markets 11
Loss-making resales across the regions 13
Pain & Gain: Sydney council regions 14
Pain & Gain: Melbourne council regions 15
Pain & Gain: South-East Queensland council regions 16
Pain & Gain: Adelaide council regions 17
Pain & Gain: Perth council regions 18
Pain & Gain: Hobart council regions 19
Pain & Gain: Darwin council regions 19
Pain & Gain: Canberra council regions 20
About CoreLogic 21
Disclaimers 22
Contents

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2017 3
Executive Summary
Ninety one per cent of the properties which were resold over
the final quarter of 2017 resold for a price which was in
excess of their previous purchase price. The latest Pain and
Gain Report provides a view of how resold properties across
the country are performing. When relatively few properties
are reselling at a loss (pain) it generally indicates a stronger
housing market and when a higher proportion of properties
are reselling at a loss it indicates weaker local housing market
conditions.
Over the three months to December 2017, 91.1% of all
properties that were resold, transacted at or above their
previous purchase price. The 91.1% figure was up slightly
from 90.9% at the end of the third quarter of 2017 but slightly
lower than the 91.3% over the final quarter of 2016. There
was a reasonable gap between the proportion of houses
reselling for a gross profit, recorded at 92.3% of all resales,
while 88.2% of all unit resales were at a profit.
Over the December 2017 quarter, the total value of resales at
a profit was recorded at $17.832 billion while there was
$442.0 million in realised losses from resales. The majority of
the $17.832 billion in profit was generated by Sydney and
Melbourne which accounted for 33.1% and 29.4% of total
profits respectively. This is reflective of both the higher cost
of housing in Sydney and Melbourne and the strong growth in
dwelling values over recent years which have resulted in
substantial profits. As a comparison, these two cities
accounted for just 11.3% and 6.6% of the total value of losses
nationally over the quarter.
When looking at the regions which have the lowest proportion
of resales at a loss, the data is now showing that some of the
regions surrounding Sydney and Melbourne are recording
even fewer resales at a loss than the capital cities. At the
other end of the spectrum, three regions, all of which are
linked to the resources sector, recorded at least half of all
resales at a loss over the quarter. The regions nationally with
the highest proportion of resales at a loss are typically linked
to the resources sector. It should be noted that in many of
these regions the share of losses is now lower than at the
peak however instances of loss remain elevated; a reflection
that housing values remain well below their peaks in these
areas.
Capital city housing markets have continued to record a lower
proportion of resales at a loss than regional markets. It
should be noted though that the instances of loss is showing
little change across the combined capital cities while loss
making sales continue to trend lower across regional areas,
highlighting improving conditions in many regional areas,
particularly coastal markets where demand for lifestyle
properties has lifted.

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Dec 1997 Dec 2001 Dec 2005 Dec 2009 Dec 2013 Dec 2017
Combined Capitals Combined Regional
Proportion of loss making sales, combined capitals v regional markets
National Overview
91.1% of properties that were resold over the final quarter of
2017 transacted at the same or a higher price than what they
were purchased for. Clearly this figure shows that the vast
majority of vendors selling homes are making a profit. The
91.1% of properties resold at a profit was up from 90.9% at
the end of the previous quarter but slightly lower than the
91.3% resold at a profit over the same quarter in 2016.
Capital city properties that are being resold remain more likely
to sell for a profit than those in regional markets. It should be
noted though that the proportion of resales at a profit across
regional markets continues to rise while the proportion of
resales at a profit in capital city markets has been relatively
unchanged over recent quarters.
Over the December 2017 quarter, 92.7% of capital city
properties resold for a profit compared to 88.4% of regional
properties. The proportion of profit-making resales across the
capital cities was unchanged from the previous quarter but
lower than the 93.5% of resales a year earlier.
Across the combined non-capital city markets, the 88.4% of
resales at a profit increased from 88.0% the previous quarter
and was up from 87.3% a year earlier. The trend towards
fewer sales at a loss across regional market reflects the fact
that the most recent data shows that dwelling values in
regional markets continue to rise as capital city values drift
lower. Note that most of the strength in regional markets is
being driven by areas close to capital cities such as Sydney,
Melbourne and Brisbane, as well as some coastal markets,
while mining regions continue to record heightened levels of
resales at a loss.
With more than 90% of properties selling for a price at or in
excess of their previous purchase price, the realised profits
from resales substantially outweighed the value of realised
losses over the quarter.
Nationally, there was $17.832 billion worth of realised gross
profits from resales over the December 2017 quarter. The
total value of these profits was substantially higher than the
$442.0 million in realised gross losses from resales. Of
course, this is by virtue of the fact that only 8.9% of all resales
were at a loss over the quarter.
Throughout the combined capital cities, the total value of
resales at a profit was recorded at $14.249 billion. Based on
these figures the combined capital cities generated 79.9% of
the total value of all profits over the quarter. By comparison,
the total value of losses over the quarter was $225.8 million
which indicates that capital cities generated 51.1% of the total
value of losses nationally over the quarter.
Across the combined regional markets, the total value of
realised profits from resales over the quarter was $3.584
billion. At the same time, the value of realised losses from
resales was recorded at $213.1 million.

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Houses Units
Proportion of loss making resales, combined capital cities, houses v units
National Overview
According to the accompanying chart, when looking at resales
of houses and units, houses have consistently recorded a
higher proportion of resales at a profit than units. This can be
linked to a number factors such as: Australians generally
having a preference for detached housing as opposed to
attached, a house typically has a greater underlying land
value than a unit which is what the overall value is largely
derived from and unit markets can be more prone to
oversupplies than houses markets.
Across the nation, 92.3% of all houses resold over the quarter
transacted at the same or a higher price than that which they
were purchased for compared to 88.2% of units. The
proportion of profit-making house sales was unchanged
compared to the previous quarter but down from 92.8% the
same quarter in 2016. For units, the 88.2% of profit-making
resales was up from 87.7% at the end of the previous quarter
and higher than the 87.5% a year earlier.
Throughout the combined capital city housing markets, 94.2%
of houses and 89.5% of units resold for a profit over the final
quarter of 2017. For houses, the proportion of profit-making
resales was marginally lower over the quarter (94.3%) as well
as being lower than a year earlier (95.1%). The 89.5% of
capital city units resold at a loss over the quarter was slightly
higher than the 89.3% the previous quarter but was lower
than the 89.9% a year previous.
Across the combined regional markets, the proportion of
resales at a profit for units (85.1%) remains lower than houses
(89.3%). Resales at a profit for houses were unchanged from
the previous quarter while for units they had increased from
84.0%. The proportion of regional houses reselling for a profit
in the final quarter of 2017 was higher than the 89.0% over
the final quarter of 2016 while for units the proportion was
also higher than the 81.7% at the end of 2016.

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Perth Hobart Darwin Canberra
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Sydney Melbourne Brisbane Adelaide
Proportion of total resales at a loss over time: Sydney vs. Melbourne vs. Brisbane vs. Adelaide
Proportion of total resales at a loss over time: Perth vs. Hobart vs. Darwin vs. Canberra
National Overview
The instances of loss-making resales fell over the December
2017 quarter relative to the September 2017 quarter in
Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide, Darwin and Canberra but
rose elsewhere. When comparing to a year earlier, there
were fewer resales at a loss in Melbourne, Hobart and
Canberra with all other capital cities having recorded an
increase.
Over the final quarter of 2017, the proportion of resales at a
loss across each capital city was recorded at: 2.0% in
Sydney, 3.1% in Melbourne, 8.4% in Brisbane, 7.7% in
Adelaide, 27.1% in Perth, 2.9% in Hobart, 32.1% in Darwin
and 5.6% in Canberra. In Melbourne, the proportion of
resales at a loss was the lowest since the three months to
June 2011 over the quarter. By contrast, the proportion of
resales at a loss in Perth was the highest it’s been on record.
In the non-capital city markets, the proportion of resales at a
loss was lower over the quarter in regional areas of NSW, Vic,
WA and Tas but higher elsewhere. Over the year, the
proportion of resales at a loss was higher in regional areas of
SA, WA and NT but lower elsewhere. As at the end of 2017,
the proportion of resales at a loss across the regional markets
were recorded at: 4.7% in NSW, 5.6% in Vic, 17.8% in Qld,
22.6% in SA, 37.5% in WA, 12.9% in Tas and 27.7% in NT.
The share of resales at a loss in regional NSW was the lowest
it has been since August 2005 and in regional Vic it was the
lowest it’s been since July 2011.

Houses Units
Region Pain Gain Pain Gain
Sydney 2.3% 97.7% 1.5% 98.5%
Regional NSW 4.3% 95.7% 6.6% 93.4%
Melbourne 0.8% 99.2% 7.9% 92.1%
Regional Vic 5.4% 94.6% 7.3% 92.7%
Brisbane 3.0% 97.0% 26.2% 73.8%
Regional Qld 17.0% 83.0% 19.2% 80.8%
Adelaide 6.4% 93.6% 11.2% 88.8%
Regional SA 22.2% 77.8% 25.3% 74.7%
Perth 24.3% 75.7% 40.8% 59.2%
Regional WA 36.0% 64.0% 56.1% 43.9%
Hobart 2.9% 97.1% 2.9% 97.1%
Regional Tas 12.3% 87.7% 17.3% 82.7%
Darwin 28.3% 71.7% 40.5% 59.5%
Regional NT 21.4% 78.6% 45.8% 54.2%
Australian Capital Territory 1.7% 98.3% 12.5% 87.5%
National 7.7% 92.3% 11.8% 88.2%
Cap city 5.8% 94.2% 10.5% 89.5%
Regional 10.7% 89.3% 14.9% 85.1%
Proportion of total resales at a loss/gain, houses vs. units, Dec 2017 quarter
Houses vs Units
Across the nation, a higher proportion of houses are resold at
a profit than units. This trend is also replicated across the
combined capital city and combined regional markets.
Sydney is the only region in which a greater proportion of
units resold for a profit over the quarter than houses although
Hobart had an equivalent share for houses and units.
In Melbourne, units were almost 10 times more likely to resell
at a loss than houses while in Brisbane units were almost 9
times as likely to resell for a loss than houses and in Canberra
units were 7.4 times more likely to resell at a loss than
houses.
For the capital cities, the proportion of houses reselling at a
gross profit was higher over the quarter in Brisbane, Adelaide
and Darwin but lower elsewhere. For units, there was a
higher proportion of resales at a profit over the quarter in
Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Hobart and Canberra.
For the regional housing markets, the proportion of houses
reselling for a profit increased over the quarter in Regional
NSW, Regional Vic, Regional WA and Regional Tas. For
units, profit-making resales increased over the quarter in all
regions except for Regional NT.

Suburb State
Total
resales
% at a loss
Pegs Creek WA 13 92.3%
West Gladstone Qld 11 81.8%
South Hedland WA 38 81.6%
Douglas Qld 10 80.0%
Withers WA 10 80.0%
Newman WA 12 75.0%
Wilson WA 10 70.0%
Gracemere Qld 10 70.0%
North Mackay Qld 10 70.0%
Bulgarra WA 10 70.0%
Emerald Qld 19 68.4%
Bushland Beach Qld 12 66.7%
Nickol WA 14 64.3%
Bertram WA 11 63.6%
Westminster WA 11 63.6%
Clinton Qld 11 63.6%
Kirwan Qld 37 62.2%
Innaloo WA 28 60.7%
Davoren Park SA 10 60.0%
Avenell Heights Qld 10 60.0%
Chinchilla Qld 10 60.0%
Moranbah Qld 10 60.0%
Roma Qld 10 60.0%
Highest Proportion of total resales at a loss, over the December 2017 quarter, houses (LHS) and units (RHS)
Suburbs with the highest share of resales at a loss
The tables below highlight the suburbs across the country that
have experienced the highest proportion of loss-making
resales over the December 2017 quarter. The list shows the
Top 20 for houses and units and only includes those suburbs
that had at least 10 resales of properties over the quarter.
Both the list for houses and units has a strong slant towards
regions of Qld and WA. This is reflective of the ongoing weak
housing conditions in these two states over recent years.
Pegs Creek, a suburb of Karratha in regional WA had the
highest proportion of resales at a loss throughout the
December 2017 quarter. Of the 13 properties resold over the
quarter, 92.3% of the sales were at a price below the previous
purchase price. Yeppoon, located in coastal Central
Queensland, had the highest proportion of unit resales at a
loss over the quarter. Of the 10 resales, 8 were at a price
below the previous purchase price.
Each of the 20 suburbs with the highest proportion of houses
resold at a loss recorded at least 60% of sales at a loss. The
Top 20 list also has a particularly strong slant towards
suburbs linked to the mining and resources sector in Qld and
WA. Of the 20 suburbs listed, 10 are located in WA, nine are
situated in Qld and one is located in SA.
The list for suburbs for units with the highest proportion of
resales at a loss is somewhat different to the list for houses.
Although Qld and WA still dominate the list, it is more slanted
towards suburbs within capital city and major regional areas.
This is reflective of large volumes of new unit supply in recent
years and the underperformance of the units sector as supply
has ramped-up. Of the top 20 list, 12 suburbs are located in
Qld (4 in Brisbane), six in WA (all in Perth) and one each in
Vic and ACT.
Suburb State
Total
resales
% at a loss
Yeppoon Qld 10 80.0%
Travancore Vic 14 78.6%
Perth WA 34 73.5%
Palm Cove Qld 20 70.0%
Townsville City Qld 12 66.7%
Zillmere Qld 11 63.6%
Mandurah WA 22 63.6%
Subiaco WA 18 61.1%
Airlie Beach Qld 15 60.0%
Cannonvale Qld 10 60.0%
North Ward Qld 19 57.9%
Calamvale Qld 14 57.1%
South Perth WA 35 57.1%
Manoora Qld 14 57.1%
Maylands WA 37 56.8%
Westcourt Qld 18 55.6%
Auchenflower Qld 15 53.3%
South Brisbane Qld 15 53.3%
Rockingham WA 25 52.0%
Belconnen ACT 22 50.0%

PAIN GAIN
Region Owner Occupied Investor Owner Occupied Investor
Sydney 2.2% 1.7% 97.8% 98.3%
Regional NSW 4.4% 5.4% 95.6% 94.6%
Melbourne 1.4% 5.6% 98.6% 94.4%
Regional Vic 4.9% 7.0% 95.1% 93.0%
Brisbane 5.3% 13.9% 94.7% 86.1%
Regional Qld 14.1% 24.0% 85.9% 76.0%
Adelaide 6.6% 9.8% 93.4% 90.2%
Regional SA 21.2% 26.5% 78.8% 73.5%
Perth 24.1% 33.6% 75.9% 66.4%
Regional WA 32.5% 47.5% 67.5% 52.5%
Hobart 2.9% 2.9% 97.1% 97.1%
Regional Tas 11.1% 17.7% 88.9% 82.3%
Darwin 29.9% 33.6% 70.1% 66.4%
Regional NT 27.6% 27.8% 72.4% 72.2%
Australian Capital Territory 2.4% 12.4% 97.6% 87.6%
National 7.5% 11.3% 92.5% 88.7%
Cap city 6.1% 9.3% 93.9% 90.7%
Regional 9.8% 15.3% 90.2% 84.7%
Proportion of total resales at a loss/gain, owner occupied vs. investors, Dec 2017 quarter
Investor vs Owner Occupier Resales
Investors continued to be more likely to resell their properties
at a loss than owner occupiers during the final quarter of
2017. Over the quarter, 7.5% of owner occupied properties
sold at a loss compared to the 11.3% of investor owned
properties. Sydney was the only major region of the country
in which a higher proportion of investors resold their property
at a loss than owner occupiers.
93.9% of capital city properties resold by owner occupiers
transacted at a profit over the December 2017 quarter
compared to 90.7% of investor owned properties. Throughout
all capital cities the gap in profit making-resales between
owner occupiers and investors was not that large however,
across individual cities the results were much more varied.
Melbourne investors were 4 times as likely to resell a property
at a loss than an owner occupier, in Brisbane investors were
2.6 times as likely to sell at a loss and in Canberra they were
5.2 times as likely to sell for a loss.
Across the regional areas of the country, investors were much
more likely to resell a property for a loss (15.3%) than owner
occupiers (9.8%). While in each region owner occupiers were
more likely than investors to resell for a profit, the gap
between the two vendor type performances was nowhere
near as great in regional areas as what was recorded in some
capital city markets.
Clearly, any property owner will aim to make a profit from the
sale of their property. In a falling market owner occupiers may
be more prepared to sell at a loss if they are purchasing their
next home at an equivalent or greater discount. Meanwhile,
investors, because of taxation rules, would seemingly be
more prepared to incur a loss because they (unlike owner
occupiers) can offset those loses against future capital gains.
If home values fall, investors (which have been increasingly
active in the housing market) may be more inclined to sell at a
loss and offset those losses which in turn could result in much
more supply becoming available for purchase at a time in
which demand for housing falls because values are declining.

PAIN GAIN
Region Houses Units Houses Units
Sydney 3.6 3.1 9.2 7.2
Regional NSW 6.8 7.4 8.6 7.5
Melbourne 4.4 5.9 9.1 7.8
Regional Vic 5.2 6.1 8.3 8.1
Brisbane 7.5 6.8 9.1 9.9
Regional Qld 7.4 9.6 9.2 8.2
Adelaide 6.3 6.5 9.3 9.1
Regional SA 8.1 8.5 9.8 11.2
Perth 5.5 7.2 11.6 12.9
Regional WA 7.5 8.9 12.1 9.8
Hobart 3.8 6.7 9.0 7.9
Regional Tas 8.1 7.3 8.8 8.7
Darwin 4.6 5.2 10.8 12.8
Regional NT 5.9 5.2 7.9 11.3
Australian Capital Territory 6.5 6.9 10.7 8.7
National 6.4 7.2 9.2 8.0
Cap city 5.4 6.2 9.6 8.0
Regional 7.1 9.0 8.8 8.0
Median hold period of resales at a loss/gain, houses vs. units, Dec 2017 quarter
Hold Periods
Houses that sold at a loss over the December 2017 quarter
were owned for a median 6.4 years compared to a median of
9.2 years for those sold at a profit. For units, those sold at a
loss had a median hold period of 7.2 years while those sold
for a profit were typically held for 8.0 years.
Capital city houses resold at a loss had a median hold period
of 5.4 years compared to 6.2 years for units. Capital city
houses resold for a profit were typically held 9.6 years
compared to 8.0 years for units. Houses sold at a loss in
Sydney, Melbourne and Hobart typically had a much shorter
hold period than other capital cities while units resold at a loss
in Sydney had a much lower hold period than those in the
other capital cities. These trends reflect the much stronger
value growth performances in these cities over recent years.
In terms of profit-making resales, the median hold periods for
houses were substantially longer in Perth, Darwin and
Canberra than they were elsewhere. For units, Perth and
Darwin had much longer median hold periods than elsewhere.
These trends indicate weaker housing market performance in
these markets over recent years.
In regional Australia, houses resold for a loss were typically
held for 7.1 years compared to 8.8 years for those sold at a
profit. For regional unit markets, the average hold period for
resales at a loss (9.0 years) was actually longer than for those
resold at a profit (8.0 years). For houses resold at a loss, the
typical hold period was shortest in regional NT and longest in
regional SA and regional Tas. For loss-making unit resales
hold periods were much shorter in regional NT than elsewhere
and much longer in the persistently weak markets of regional
Qld and regional WA. For houses reselling for a profit, typical
hold periods were much lower than elsewhere in regional NT
and much longer in regional WA. For units, hold periods were
longest in regional SA and regional NT but much lower in
regional NSW.

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Central Qld
Hunter Valley (ex, Newcastle)
Mackay - Isaac - Whitsunday
Outback SA
Outback (North) WA
Outback (South) WA
Proportion of total resales at a loss over time: major resource regions
Focus on Regional Markets
Major mining regions
The instances of resales of properties at a loss in the major
mining regions generally remains at heightened levels.
Although losses remain high, the proportion of resales at a
loss has reduced from their peaks, most of which occurred
recently. The excpeption is Outback (North) in WA where loss
making resales reached a new record high over the
December quarter. There may be slightly fewer resales at a
loss in these regions however, these areas continue to be
hindered by soft housing demand due to few economic drivers
of demand outside of the resources sector. Encouragingly,
there has been a rebound in commodity prices which may
help the proportion of resales at a loss to continue to trend
lower, however those properties purchased around the peak
of market conditions will likely take a long time to recover their
purchase value.
Across the six regions analysed, the proportion of resales at a
loss over the December 2017 quarter was recorded at: 50.0%
in Central Qld, 7.8% in Hunter Valley (excluding Newcastle),
50.5% in Mackay-Isaac-Whitsunday, 38.2% Outback SA,
67.4% in Outback (North) WA and 45.7% in Outback (South)
WA. Although in most regions the proportion of resales at a
loss is lower than at the peak, in every region except Outback
(South) the proportion increases over the quarter. Over the
past year, the proportion of loss-making resales increased
across all regions analysed except for Hunter Valley
(excluding Newcastle) and Mackay-Isaac-Whitsunday.
While the proportion of resales at a loss has increased over
the quarter across half of these regions there are firming signs
that housing market conditions may be improving. Sales
volumes have bottomed in many of these regions and if
anything lifted marginally. Despite the uptick in loss-making
resales over the quarter, Outback (North) WA, a broad region
which includes the mining regions in the north of Western
Australia is the only one of these six regions in which the
proportion of loss-making resales is currently at an historic
high.
While the resources sector is looking somewhat stronger than
it has in a number of years, it is expected that the instances of
resales at a loss will remain elevated despite the gradually
improving trend. Although transaction volumes are generally
no longer falling, demand remains low and there are still many
owners that bought at or near the market peak looking to sell
and likely to incur losses when they do eventually sell their
property.

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Geelong
Bunbury
Cairns
Gold Coast
Sunshine Coast
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Illawarra
Newcastle and Lake Macquarie
Richmond - Tweed
Mid North Coast
Proportion of total resales at a loss over time: major coastal markets
Focus on Regional Markets
Major coastal regions
Most of the major coastal markets
across the country have continued
to see the proportion of loss making
resales fall over the past quarter
and year. These regions continue
to benefit from rising housing
demand, particularly those located
relatively close to capital cities. In
certain areas of NSW and Vic the
high cost of housing in the capital
cities is pushing buyers into these
markets. In some of these areas, as
well as others, we are also seeing
growing demand for housing in
coastal and lifestyle markets.
Across those regions analysed, the
proportion of resales at a loss over
the December 2017 quarter were
recorded at: 1.3% in Illawarra, 2.1%
in Newcastle and Lake Macquarie,
4.9% in Richmond-Tweed, 4.1% in
Mid North Coast, 1.9% in Geelong,
27.4% in Bunbury, 24.9% in Cairns,
8.2% in Gold Coast and 5.2% in
Sunshine Coast.
The proportion of homes resold at a
loss fell across most of these
regions over the past quarter, the
exceptions were: Newcastle and
Lake Macquarie, Geelong, Bunbury
and Cairns.
The proportion of resales at a loss in
Richmond-Tweed are at their lowest
level since March 2010. On the
Mind North Coast the proportion of
resales at a loss is at its lowest
levels since April 2005 and on the
Sunshine Coast the proportion of
resales at a loss is the lowest since
June 2008.
Across all of these regions except
for Bunbury, the proportion of loss-
making resales is substantially lower
than it has been over recent years.
It highlights the resurgent
confidence in coastal and lifestyle
markets which has emerged over
the past few years. It is anticipated
that the improvement in overall
housing market conditions in major
coastal/lifestyle markets will
continue over the coming year.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Australian Capital Territory
Capital Region
Central West
Coffs Harbour - Grafton
Far West and Orana
Hunter Valley exc Newcastle
Illawarra
Mid North Coast
Murray
New England and North West
Newcastle and Lake Macquarie
Richmond - Tweed
Riverina
Southern Highlands and Shoalhaven
Sydney
Darwin
Northern Territory - Outback
Brisbane
Cairns
Central Queensland
Darling Downs - Maranoa
Gold Coast
Mackay - Isaac - Whitsunday
Queensland - Outback
Sunshine Coast
Toowoomba
Townsville
Wide Bay
Adelaide
Barossa - Yorke - Mid North
South Australia - Outback
South Australia - South East
Hobart
Launceston and North East
South East
West and North West
Ballarat
Bendigo
Geelong
Hume
Latrobe - Gippsland
Melbourne
North West
Shepparton
Warrnambool and South West
Bunbury
Perth
Western Australia - Outback (North)
Western Australia - Outback (South)
Western Australia - Wheat Belt
NSWNTQLDSATASVICWA
Units
Houses
Proportion of loss-making re-sales, December Quarter
2017 non-capital city SA4 regions and GCCSA regions,
houses and units
Units within regional markets are generally showing
the largest proportion of loss-making re-sales
From a national perspective the largest proportion of
loss-making resales were located in the following
regions:
▶ Outback (North) (WA) (67.4%)
▶ Mackay-Isaac-Whitsunday (Qld) (50.5%)
▶ Central (Qld) (50.0%)
▶ Townsville (Qld) (46.8%)
▶ Outback (South) (WA) (45.7%)
▶ Outback (SA) (38.2%)
▶ Darwin (NT) (32.1%)
▶ Outback (Qld) (31.0%)
▶ Wheat Belt (WA) (28.5%)
▶ Outback (NT) (27.7%)
The lowest proportion of loss-making resales were
recorded in the following regions:
▶ Southern Highlands and Shoalhaven (NSW) (1.2%)
▶ Illawarra (NSW) (1.3%)
▶ Geelong (Vic) (1.9%)
▶ Sydney (NSW) (2.0%)
▶ Newcastle and Lake Macquarie (NSW) (2.1%)
▶ Hobart (Tas) (2.9%)
▶ Melbourne (Vic) (3.1%)
▶ Hume (Vic) (3.6%)
▶ Coffs Harbour -Grafton (NSW) (3.8%)
▶ Mid North Coast (NSW) (4.1%)

Region % of all sales
Median hold
period
Median
loss
Total value of
loss
% of all sales
Median hold
period
Median profit
Total value of
profit
Ashfield 1.2% 1.1 -$1,250,000 -$1,250,000 98.8% 9.1 $405,000 $47,188,873
Auburn 2.1% 2.6 -$17,500 -$80,500 97.9% 7.0 $236,000 $62,047,142
Bankstown 3.1% 3.2 -$75,000 -$1,197,185 96.9% 8.3 $371,500 $116,648,431
Blacktown 1.9% 2.3 -$45,000 -$1,511,980 98.1% 8.3 $341,500 $270,821,887
Blue Mountains 0.4% 9.4 -$127,750 -$132,500 99.6% 8.0 $313,000 $85,444,113
Botany Bay 1.4% 1.1 -$31,000 -$31,000 98.6% 9.3 $464,500 $41,091,760
Burwood 100.0% 8.9 $441,000 $27,270,392
Camden 1.1% 1.4 -$213,250 -$426,500 98.9% 7.0 $295,000 $69,150,188
Campbelltown 1.1% 4.3 -$43,000 -$238,000 98.9% 8.3 $307,500 $144,719,492
Canada Bay 0.5% 5.7 -$235,000 -$235,000 99.5% 6.8 $498,000 $125,882,081
Canterbury 3.0% 3.0 -$35,000 -$824,334 97.0% 7.6 $290,500 $110,766,652
Fairfield 5.7% 2.0 -$180,000 -$3,321,618 94.3% 10.0 $402,000 $103,878,039
Gosford 1.2% 6.8 -$105,000 -$836,667 98.8% 6.9 $302,500 $212,629,257
Hawkesbury 0.7% 2.5 -$800,000 -$800,000 99.3% 7.7 $351,000 $59,065,600
Holroyd 3.7% 5.7 -$48,000 -$1,596,500 96.3% 8.7 $311,000 $107,607,815
Hornsby 0.7% 5.6 -$135,000 -$270,000 99.3% 10.7 $650,000 $216,227,061
Hunters Hill 100.0% 8.9 $933,500 $26,084,600
Hurstville 3.8% 3.1 -$255,000 -$1,021,000 96.2% 8.2 $373,000 $82,210,735
Kogarah 1.8% 1.8 -$485,500 -$971,000 98.2% 8.4 $364,000 $58,591,866
Ku-ring-gai 1.5% 2.4 -$164,750 -$2,394,250 98.5% 8.0 $852,500 $265,159,882
Lane Cove 2.6% 1.5 -$101,000 -$227,600 97.4% 7.0 $458,000 $71,891,160
Leichhardt 1.8% 6.2 -$375,750 -$1,451,500 98.2% 7.7 $737,000 $130,809,035
Liverpool 4.2% 4.2 -$65,000 -$1,511,809 95.8% 8.8 $310,500 $130,764,468
Manly 1.4% 2.5 -$243,750 -$487,500 98.6% 7.6 $810,000 $134,064,749
Marrickville 1.1% 3.4 -$282,500 -$565,000 98.9% 8.5 $561,000 $118,994,972
Mosman 2.8% 9.7 -$865,029 -$1,730,058 97.2% 6.8 $526,750 $51,603,332
North Sydney 1.2% 5.5 -$203,313 -$781,625 98.8% 9.1 $513,334 $167,414,661
Parramatta 1.4% 3.4 -$115,500 -$884,120 98.6% 7.5 $290,000 $143,212,950
Penrith 2.4% 2.3 -$20,000 -$850,000 97.6% 8.5 $323,000 $191,570,249
Pittwater 3.0% 3.0 -$86,000 -$1,525,000 97.0% 8.1 $660,000 $182,017,375
Randwick 2.6% 5.6 -$355,000 -$2,146,001 97.4% 8.5 $565,000 $212,295,956
Rockdale 1.0% 3.9 -$340,000 -$680,000 99.0% 7.3 $350,000 $87,709,967
Ryde 3.4% 3.1 -$40,500 -$953,000 96.6% 9.2 $456,000 $154,738,585
Strathfield 100.0% 6.6 $277,500 $50,067,750
Sutherland Shire 2.5% 4.6 -$210,000 -$5,711,000 97.5% 9.4 $470,000 $340,345,786
Sydney 1.4% 2.2 -$76,250 -$1,258,500 98.6% 7.9 $404,000 $338,172,407
The Hills Shire 1.0% 2.6 -$127,500 -$655,000 99.0% 10.0 $661,000 $287,235,664
Warringah 1.2% 3.4 -$232,500 -$2,209,000 98.8% 7.6 $555,000 $293,478,856
Waverley 2.4% 2.9 -$145,000 -$300,000 97.6% 7.0 $695,000 $111,689,635
Willoughby 2.6% 3.6 -$370,000 -$2,671,000 97.4% 9.5 $715,500 $142,948,565
Wollondilly 4.1% 4.2 -$224,900 -$2,360,900 95.9% 7.1 $305,000 $44,801,665
Woollahra 2.0% 3.7 -$370,000 -$1,624,250 98.0% 8.0 $625,000 $113,607,830
Wyong 1.9% 10.8 -$177,750 -$2,132,500 98.1% 8.2 $244,900 $166,238,129
Gross loss-making sales, Dec-17 qtr Gross profit-making sales, Dec-17 qtr
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Dec 2002 Dec 2007 Dec 2012 Dec 2017
Houses Units
Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units, Sydney
Pain & Gain
Sydney council regions
Throughout the final quarter of 2017, the total value of
resales for a profit in Sydney was $5.898 billion and the total
value of resales at a loss was $49.9 million. Based on this
data, Sydney accounted for 33.1% of all resales at a profit
nationally over the quarter and 11.3% of the total value of
losses. Burwood, Hunters Hill and Strathfield each recorded
no resales at a loss over the quarter while Fairfield,
Liverpool and Wollondilly had the highest proportion of
resales at a loss throughout the city. Sydney’s strong
growth trend over the past cycle has kept loss making sales
to a minimum, however, with dwelling values now drifting
lower we may start to see a reduction in the overall
proportion of sales selling at a gross profit.

0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
Dec 2002 Dec 2007 Dec 2012 Dec 2017
Houses Units
Median hold
period
Median
loss
Total value of
loss
% of all sales
Median hold
period
Median profit
Total value of
profit
Banyule 3.2% 4.1 -$32,250 -$1,172,100 96.8% 9.3 $428,750 $192,494,720
Bayside 2.3% 5.5 -$65,000 -$549,000 97.7% 8.3 $581,000 $187,707,950
Boroondara 3.6% 5.7 -$25,000 -$1,049,400 96.4% 10.7 $645,000 $340,746,586
Brimbank 0.5% 4.9 -$48,500 -$97,000 99.5% 8.5 $305,000 $137,331,064
Cardinia 100.0% 6.1 $202,025 $67,211,895
Casey 0.4% 6.0 -$27,500 -$141,683 99.6% 8.3 $277,500 $213,414,545
Darebin 1.9% 5.1 -$30,000 -$717,990 98.1% 8.3 $350,000 $183,156,900
Frankston 0.5% 7.8 -$32,000 -$121,750 99.5% 8.0 $283,000 $185,900,126
Glen Eira 3.0% 3.8 -$18,500 -$801,500 97.0% 9.9 $392,000 $230,275,052
Greater Dandenong 1.8% 3.7 -$140,119 -$813,130 98.2% 7.7 $272,500 $105,395,480
Hobsons Bay 0.4% 1.9 -$307,500 -$610,000 99.6% 9.2 $410,000 $114,987,847
Hume 1.1% 3.8 -$26,250 -$702,500 98.9% 7.7 $221,000 $132,516,835
Kingston 1.5% 5.2 -$24,500 -$567,000 98.5% 9.3 $435,000 $229,887,017
Knox 0.3% 2.9 -$30,000 -$30,000 99.7% 10.3 $444,673 $182,388,963
Macedon Ranges 100.0% 8.2 $255,000 $17,051,600
Manningham 6.5% 2.3 -$44,000 -$1,075,612 93.5% 12.1 $658,500 $175,331,309
Maribyrnong 5.6% 4.5 -$38,000 -$723,483 94.4% 7.6 $325,500 $93,545,623
Maroondah 0.9% 2.1 -$60,000 -$236,000 99.1% 10.2 $418,450 $156,359,948
Melbourne 22.0% 6.6 -$43,500 -$6,597,491 78.0% 9.1 $134,500 $107,708,132
Melton 1.6% 5.9 -$15,000 -$154,000 98.4% 7.0 $185,000 $78,306,830
Mitchell 100.0% 5.5 $132,000 $7,856,802
Monash 2.2% 3.6 -$72,500 -$559,698 97.8% 11.7 $630,500 $253,824,084
Moonee Valley 7.4% 7.2 -$75,000 -$1,965,950 92.6% 8.2 $389,000 $157,522,807
Moorabool 100.0% 6.2 $155,000 $8,354,401
Moreland 3.4% 4.6 -$25,000 -$1,009,257 96.6% 8.1 $310,000 $181,455,209
Mornington Peninsula 0.4% 2.3 -$90,000 -$395,000 99.6% 8.4 $349,000 $296,987,501
Murrindindi 100.0% 14.2 $175,000 $641,000
Nillumbik 0.7% 5.6 -$295,100 -$295,100 99.3% 8.8 $383,500 $69,756,919
Port Phillip 6.8% 6.2 -$46,000 -$2,845,000 93.2% 9.3 $277,500 $140,707,222
Stonnington 12.9% 5.9 -$36,500 -$2,307,771 87.1% 9.5 $446,000 $141,739,463
Whitehorse 2.6% 5.2 -$40,000 -$1,220,100 97.4% 10.6 $592,500 $303,066,254
Whittlesea 1.6% 4.5 -$21,500 -$230,000 98.4% 7.6 $266,000 $107,550,454
Wyndham 0.7% 4.8 -$92,501 -$375,001 99.3% 7.3 $227,500 $135,234,791
Yarra 9.5% 5.5 -$34,000 -$1,733,017 90.5% 8.3 $373,000 $150,871,454
Yarra Ranges 0.2% 6.7 -$88,000 -$88,000 99.8% 9.3 $322,000 $158,664,854
Pain & Gain
Melbourne council regions
Over the December 2017 quarter, resales of Melbourne
properties generated $5.246 billion worth of profits and $29.2
million in losses. These figures indicated that Melbourne
generated 29.4% of total resale profits nationally over the
quarter as well as producing 6.6% of total resales losses.
Over the quarter, there were no resales at a loss in a number
of council regions: Cardinia, Macedon Ranges, Mitchell,
Moorabool and Murrundindi. The council regions with the
highest proportion of resales at a loss were Melbourne,
Stonnington and Yarra. With the unit sector across Melbourne
recently showing a higher capital gain profile compared with
houses, we may start to see a narrowing of the gap between
houses and units reselling at a loss.
Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units, Melbourne

Median hold
period
Median
loss
Total value of
loss
% of all sales
Median hold
period
Median profit
Total value of
profit
Brisbane 9.6% 6.2 -$30,000 -$14,026,277 90.4% 9.9 $186,000 $811,337,880
Gold Coast 8.2% 9.6 -$40,000 -$15,613,522 91.8% 8.3 $132,750 $482,076,853
Ipswich 8.4% 8.0 -$20,500 -$963,069 91.6% 9.0 $63,500 $46,148,904
Lockyer Valley 15.4% 7.7 -$17,750 -$398,350 84.6% 5.7 $61,000 $5,337,350
Logan 6.0% 8.1 -$25,008 -$2,592,812 94.0% 9.0 $85,000 $100,644,509
Moreton Bay 7.4% 7.6 -$21,300 -$3,411,867 92.6% 8.5 $90,000 $153,444,712
Redland 5.5% 7.7 -$17,500 -$663,000 94.5% 8.6 $110,000 $75,104,764
Scenic Rim 12.5% 7.4 -$11,500 -$1,302,000 87.5% 10.4 $73,000 $11,522,800
Somerset 7.1% 8.5 -$10,000 -$58,000 92.9% 9.3 $70,000 $6,089,500
Sunshine Coast 5.2% 9.7 -$50,000 -$5,795,100 94.8% 7.8 $120,000 $265,944,787
Toowoomba 8.5% 3.3 -$19,250 -$930,625 91.5% 7.2 $76,000 $41,237,945
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Dec 2002 Dec 2007 Dec 2012 Dec 2017
Houses Units
Pain & Gain
South-East Queensland council regions
Based on resales across Greater Brisbane over the final
quarter of 2017, the total value of resales at a profit was
$1.2 billion while the total value of resales at a loss was
recorded at $22.3 million. Brisbane generated 6.7% of the
total value of resale profits nationally over the quarter and
5.0% of the losses. Throughout south-east Queensland,
the council regions with the lowest proportion of resales at a
loss were Sunshine Coast, Redland and Logan while the
highest proportion of resales at a loss occurred in Lockyer
Valley, Scenic Rim and Brisbane. The divergence
between houses and units for loss making sales is likely
attributable to higher supply levels across key areas of the
inner city.
Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units, Brisbane

Median hold
period
Median
loss
Total value of
loss
% of all sales
Median hold
period
Median profit
Total value of
profit
Adelaide 14.1% 3.8 -$30,000 -$382,500 85.9% 8.6 $125,000 $12,334,550
Adelaide Hills 100.0% 9.1 $116,500 $14,815,428
Burnside 1.6% 6.3 -$102,500 -$205,000 98.4% 9.3 $195,800 $37,237,150
Campbelltown 8.0% 5.7 -$96,250 -$1,067,900 92.0% 9.9 $158,000 $29,651,157
Charles Sturt 6.8% 5.1 -$80,600 -$2,513,100 93.2% 9.1 $136,000 $48,022,520
Gawler 12.5% 5.3 -$30,000 -$307,567 87.5% 8.3 $32,500 $4,687,600
Holdfast Bay 3.1% 4.6 -$27,250 -$164,500 96.9% 10.4 $144,500 $26,900,155
Marion 4.8% 3.6 -$13,000 -$332,147 95.2% 8.7 $113,000 $40,973,756
Mitcham 3.7% 4.9 -$18,750 -$379,500 96.3% 10.0 $195,000 $36,803,304
Mount Barker 9.4% 5.2 -$10,750 -$112,320 90.6% 8.7 $67,500 $10,200,550
Norwood Payneham St Peters 5.4% 3.2 -$22,000 -$465,300 94.6% 9.5 $191,500 $27,411,199
Onkaparinga 6.1% 6.3 -$13,500 -$1,105,850 93.9% 8.6 $65,625 $45,413,085
Playford 21.9% 7.8 -$25,000 -$1,254,301 78.1% 10.1 $50,000 $12,064,371
Port Adelaide Enfield 11.7% 7.0 -$17,000 -$1,600,123 88.3% 9.1 $120,000 $41,146,329
Prospect 9.1% 5.2 -$165,000 -$685,000 90.9% 8.1 $195,750 $10,546,152
Salisbury 11.6% 6.6 -$12,000 -$637,015 88.4% 9.7 $70,000 $29,982,398
Tea Tree Gully 5.3% 5.6 -$26,000 -$811,032 94.7% 9.6 $102,500 $36,461,801
Unley 2.1% 5.5 -$220,750 -$441,500 97.9% 9.3 $188,000 $27,280,365
Walkerville 100.0% 7.3 $235,000 $2,068,000
West Torrens 5.2% 6.5 -$21,500 -$586,510 94.8% 9.3 $132,000 $25,528,435
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Dec 2002 Dec 2007 Dec 2012 Dec 2017
Houses Units
Pain & Gain
Adelaide council regions
During the final quarter of 2017, resales of Adelaide
properties generated $520.2 million in profits and $13.1
million in losses. These resales accounted for 2.9% of total
resale profits nationally and 3.0% of resale losses.
Throughout Adelaide; Adelaide Hills and Walkerville each
recorded no resales at a loss over the quarter. The council
areas with the highest proportion of resales at a loss were:
Playford, Adelaide and Gawler. Vendors who experienced
a loss in these areas realised a median gross loss of
between $25,000 and $30,000, while evidence of loss
making sales was generally much lower around inner and
middle ring suburbs.
Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units, Adelaide

Median hold
period
Median
loss
Total value of
loss
% of all sales
Median hold
period
Median profit
Total value of
profit
Armadale 33.7% 6.0 -$47,250 -$3,643,880 66.3% 8.9 $171,000 $22,265,700
Bassendean 27.7% 4.4 -$45,000 -$617,840 72.3% 12.8 $250,000 $8,384,850
Bayswater 36.7% 6.2 -$50,000 -$3,402,548 63.3% 11.9 $187,500 $21,290,938
Belmont 20.5% 7.3 -$57,000 -$1,068,500 79.5% 11.8 $135,000 $12,325,188
Cambridge 10.7% 8.5 -$52,500 -$518,000 89.3% 9.4 $188,000 $27,683,763
Canning 20.9% 4.8 -$37,500 -$2,628,250 79.1% 12.1 $215,000 $36,561,411
Claremont 13.0% 8.3 -$36,000 -$248,500 87.0% 12.5 $340,000 $6,659,500
Cockburn 26.0% 4.5 -$37,500 -$4,893,857 74.0% 10.9 $217,500 $43,768,953
Cottesloe 6.7% 7.1 -$85,000 -$85,000 93.3% 11.6 $700,000 $12,062,000
East Fremantle 17.4% 5.3 -$35,000 -$407,000 82.6% 12.6 $200,000 $7,244,750
Fremantle 20.0% 6.6 -$50,000 -$1,795,500 80.0% 8.2 $120,000 $18,804,428
Gosnells 27.6% 5.6 -$45,000 -$3,613,862 72.4% 12.6 $178,000 $28,300,896
Joondalup 19.5% 4.9 -$35,000 -$5,108,372 80.5% 12.6 $227,500 $90,282,650
Kalamunda 21.1% 4.1 -$35,000 -$1,880,000 78.9% 10.0 $165,000 $24,990,610
Kwinana 37.0% 7.5 -$36,000 -$1,500,601 63.0% 8.0 $150,600 $8,926,187
Mandurah 41.6% 6.3 -$50,000 -$14,117,600 58.4% 12.6 $149,000 $34,846,133
Melville 18.9% 4.7 -$45,000 -$4,245,734 81.1% 11.7 $207,500 $70,634,161
Mosman Park 7.1% 10.6 -$79,000 -$158,000 92.9% 9.7 $133,500 $8,727,500
Mundaring 22.3% 5.7 -$30,000 -$977,800 77.7% 12.7 $210,500 $15,686,150
Murray 27.3% 9.0 -$39,000 -$1,035,000 72.7% 13.4 $225,000 $6,130,500
Nedlands 17.3% 3.2 -$25,000 -$277,000 82.7% 12.8 $812,500 $33,126,012
Peppermint Grove
Perth 50.4% 8.0 -$76,000 -$7,416,760 49.6% 12.9 $119,500 $8,898,612
Rockingham 38.1% 8.0 -$76,000 -$7,198,902 61.9% 12.9 $119,500 $38,526,460
Serpentine-Jarrahdale 18.6% 5.6 -$36,000 -$382,500 81.4% 12.2 $149,000 $8,617,950
South Perth 27.8% 4.8 -$23,750 -$4,107,311 72.2% 6.2 $215,000 $33,111,400
Stirling 27.2% 8.1 -$49,000 -$12,629,750 72.8% 12.5 $267,500 $139,041,870
Subiaco 27.9% 6.2 -$40,000 -$1,287,000 72.1% 12.9 $210,000 $17,121,000
Swan 25.9% 4.6 -$45,000 -$4,354,808 74.1% 11.3 $180,000 $41,595,338
Victoria Park 25.0% 5.9 -$43,500 -$1,051,000 75.0% 10.8 $192,350 $15,111,027
Vincent 12.3% 6.2 -$33,000 -$521,500 87.7% 12.2 $197,700 $20,020,210
Wanneroo 26.1% 7.7 -$32,500 -$6,483,049 73.9% 11.0 $210,000 $62,707,568
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Dec 2002 Dec 2007 Dec 2012 Dec 2017
Houses Units
Pain & Gain
Perth council regions
Over the December 2017 quarter, resales of residential
properties in Perth created $923.5 million worth of resale
profits which accounted for 5.2% of resale profits nationally.
Perth also created $97.7 million in resales accounting for
22.1% of all losses nationally. Cottesloe and Mosman Park
were the only two council regions of the city in which less
than 10% of resales were at a loss over the quarter. The
highest proportion of resales at a loss over the quarter were
recorded in the Perth, Mandurah and Rockingham council
areas. With the housing market across Perth showing
tentative signs of bottoming out, we may start to see loss
making sales trending lower across the city later this year.
Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units, Perth

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Dec 2002 Dec 2007 Dec 2012 Dec 2017
Houses Units
Median hold
period
Median
loss
Total value of
loss
% of all sales
Median hold
period
Median profit
Total value of
profit
Darwin 34.5% 5.0 -$97,500 -$6,317,507 65.5% 12.0 $161,500 $17,370,886
Litchfield 30.4% 4.6 -$108,500 -$798,500 69.6% 10.4 $180,000 $3,169,850
Palmerston 28.0% 4.6 -$106,000 -$2,296,250 72.0% 10.7 $161,250 $10,193,780
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Dec 2002 Dec 2007 Dec 2012 Dec 2017
Houses Units
Median hold
period
Median
loss
Total value of
loss
% of all sales
Median hold
period
Median profit
Total value of
profit
Brighton 5.4% 4.6 -$82,000 -$221,000 94.6% 8.9 $58,500 $5,561,344
Clarence 2.3% 6.9 -$42,500 -$177,000 97.7% 8.5 $149,500 $29,583,860
Derwent Valley 4.5% 3.8 -$29,000 -$29,000 95.5% 6.5 $41,000 $1,085,055
Glenorchy 1.7% 2.3 -$15,000 -$70,000 98.3% 8.1 $110,000 $23,210,360
Hobart 2.5% 6.5 -$102,000 -$385,000 97.5% 9.1 $270,000 $47,068,945
Kingborough 3.8% 3.8 -$61,500 -$216,000 96.2% 9.3 $127,250 $18,845,763
Sorell 4.5% 3.4 -$37,938 -$240,938 95.5% 8.3 $74,250 $9,994,825
Pain & Gain
Hobart council region
Hobart resales of properties over the December 2017
quarter generated $135.4 million in profits and $1.339
million in losses. Based on these figures, Hobart accounted
for 0.8% of profits nationally over the quarter and 0.3% of
losses. With strong value growth continuing in Hobart, all
council regions recorded less than 6% of resales at a loss.
The lowest share of resales at a loss occurred in Glenorchy,
Clarence and Hobart council areas while the highest share
occurred in Brighton, Derwent Valley and Sorell. Although
growth rates may moderate from their recent highs, it’s
likely such strong growth conditions over recent years will
continue to see a relatively low proportion of loss making
sales.
Darwin council region
Over the December 2017 quarter, resales of Darwin
properties generated $30.7 million in profits and $9.4 million
in losses. Based in these figures, Darwin generated 0.2%
of national profit and 2.1% of the total value of losses.
Each region of the city has recorded a high proportion of
resales at a loss. Both Darwin and Litchfield recorded a
share of loss in excess of 20% of all resales while
Palmerston was only slightly below the 30% mark.
Importantly, the proportion of loss making sales across the
unit sector is trending lower and it appears that loss making
sales across the detached housing sector may have also
peaked. Dwelling values are still tracking lower though, so
it will be interesting to see if this improving trend can be
sustained.
Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units, Hobart
Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units, Darwin

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Dec 2002 Dec 2007 Dec 2012 Dec 2017
Houses Units
Median hold
period
Median
loss
Total value of
loss
% of all sales
Median hold
period
Median profit
Total value of
profit
Unincorporated ACT 5.6% 6.9 -$26,000 -$2,995,097 94.4% 10.0 $207,000 $294,471,042
Pain & Gain
Canberra council regions
Over the final quarter of 2017, there was $3.0 million worth
of resales at a loss for Canberra which accounted for 0.7%
of the total value of losses nationally. The market also
recorded $294.5 million in realized profits which accounted
for 1.6% of profits nationally. Over the quarter, the share of
houses resold at a loss increased slightly while there was a
fairly significant fall in the share of units resold at a loss.
With unit supply reducing across the Canberra market and
recent history of strong capital gains, loss making sales
across the unit sector are now trending lower from recent
historically high levels.
Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units, Canberra

CoreLogic Australia is a wholly owned subsidiary of CoreLogic
(NYSE: CLGX), which is the largest property data and
analytics company in the world. CoreLogic provides property
information, analytics and services across Australia, New
Zealand and Asia, and recently expanded its service offering
through the purchase of project activity and building cost
information provider Cordell. With Australia’s most
comprehensive property databases, the company’s combined
data offering is derived from public, contributory and
proprietary sources and includes over 500 million decision
points spanning over three decades of collection, providing
detailed coverage of property and other encumbrances such
as tenancy, location, hazard risk and related performance
information.
With over 20,000 customers and 150,000 end users,
CoreLogic is the leading provider of property data, analytics
and related services to consumers, investors, real estate,
mortgage, finance, banking, building services, insurance,
developers, wealth management and government. CoreLogic
delivers value to clients through unique data, analytics,
workflow technology, advisory and geo spatial services.
Clients rely on CoreLogic to help identify and manage growth
opportunities, improve performance and mitigate risk.
CoreLogic employs over 650 people across Australia and in
New Zealand. For more information call 1300 734 318 or visit
www.corelogic.com.au
Granular Data and Analytics Driving Growth in your
Business
CoreLogic RP Data produces an advanced suite of housing
market analytics that provides key insights for understanding
housing market conditions at a granular geographic level.
Granular data is often used for portfolio analysis and
benchmarking, risk assessments and understanding
development feasibility and market sizing. It gives industry
professionals valuable modules which provide essential
analytics and insights for decision making and strategy
formation within the residential property asset class. We can
tailor reports to suit your business requirements. Call us on
1300 734 318 or email us at ask@corelogic.com.au or
visit us at www.corelogic.com.au
Market Scorecard: Monitor and measure performance of an
individual office or a Franchise brand month on month through
a detailed view of the Real Estate Listing and Sales market
share across Australia. With the ability to gather market share
statistics within your active market this product is designed to
identify the competing brands and independents at a suburb,
postcode, user defined territory and State level. Easily locate
growth opportunities and market hotspots allowing you to view
the performance of the established offices in these new areas
of interest.
Market Trends: Detailed housing market indicators down to
the suburb level, with data in time series or snapshot
delivered monthly. CoreLogic RP Data’s Market Trends data
is segmented across houses and units. The Market Trends
data includes key housing market metrics such as median
prices, median values, transaction volumes, rental statistics,
vendor metrics such as average selling time and vendor
discounting rates.
CoreLogic Indices: The suite of CoreLogic Indices range
from simple market measurements such as median prices
through to repeat sales indices and our flagship hedonic
home value indices. The CoreLogic RP Data Hedonic index
has been specifically designed to track the value of a portfolio
of properties over time and is relied upon by Australian
regulators and industry as the most up to date and accurate
measurement of housing market performance.
Economist Pack: A suite of indices and indicators designed
specifically for Australian economic commentators who
require the most up to date and detailed view of housing
market conditions. The economist pack includes the
CoreLogic RP Data Hedonic indices for capital cities and ‘rest
of state’ indices, the stratified hedonic index, hedonic total
return index, auction clearance rates and median prices.
Investor Concentration Report: Understanding ownership
concentrations is an important part of assessing risk. Areas
with high investor concentrations are typically allocated higher
risk ratings due to the over-representation of a particular
segment of the market. Through a series of rules and logic,
CoreLogic RP Data has flagged the likely ownership type of
every residential property nationally as either owner occupied,
investor owned or government owned.
Mortgage Market Trend Report: CoreLogic is in a unique
position to monitor mortgage related housing market activity.
Transaction volumes, dwelling values and mortgage related
valuation events all comprise our Mortgage market trend
report which provides an invaluable tool for mortgage industry
benchmarking and strategy.
About CoreLogic

Disclaimers
In compiling this publication, RP Data Pty Ltd trading as
CoreLogic has relied upon information supplied by a number
of external sources. CoreLogic does not warrant its accuracy
or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law
excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or
damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or
body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply
or use of the whole or any part of the information in this
publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any
liability it may have to the amount paid to CoreLogic for the
supply of such information.
Queensland Data
Based on or contains data provided by the State of
Queensland (Department of Natural Resources and Mines)
2016. In consideration of the State permitting use of this data
you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty
in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability,
completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability
(including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any
loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage)
relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for
direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws.
South Australian Data
This information is based on data supplied by the South
Australian Government and is published by permission. The
South Australian Government does not accept any
responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the
published information or suitability for any purpose of the
published information or the underlying data.
New South Wales Data
Contains property sales information provided under licence
from the Land and Property Information (“LPI”). CoreLogic is
authorised as a Property Sales Information provider by the
LPI.
Victorian Data
The State of Victoria owns the copyright in the Property Sales
Data which constitutes the basis of this report and
reproduction of that data in any way without the consent of
the State of Victoria will constitute a breach of the Copyright
Act 1968 (Cth). The State of Victoria does not warrant the
accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this
report and any person using or relying upon such information
does so on the basis that the State of Victoria accepts no
responsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults,
defects or omissions in the information supplied.
Western Australian Data
Based on information provided by and with the permission of
the Western Australian Land Information Authority (2015)
trading as Landgate.
Australian Capital Territory Data
The Territory Data is the property of the Australian Capital
Territory. No part of it may in any form or by any means
(electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying,
recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system or transmitted without prior written
permission. Enquiries should be directed to: Director,
Customer Services ACT Planning and Land Authority GPO
Box 1908 Canberra ACT 2601.
Tasmanian Data
This product incorporates data that is copyright owned by the
Crown in Right of Tasmania. The data has been used in the
product with the permission of the Crown in Right of
Tasmania. The Crown in Right of Tasmania and its
employees and agents:
a) give no warranty regarding the data's accuracy,
completeness, currency or suitability for any particular
purpose; and
b) do not accept liability howsoever arising, including but
not limited to negligence for any loss resulting from the
use of or reliance upon the data.
Base data from the LIST © State of Tasmania
http://www.thelist.tas.gov.au

2018 03-2018 pain-and_gain_report_march

2018 03-2018 pain-and_gain_report_march

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from LJ Gilland Real Estate Pty Ltd

More from LJ Gilland Real Estate Pty Ltd (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2018 03-2018 pain-and_gain_report_march