dynamic.RE
dynamic.RELoading market data
Compare with
A tight-supply, appreciation-lean market. The rent math runs thin; demand and tenant incomes are the story.
What would change this read: a price correction (median already −1.1% YoY) or rent growth lifting rent-to-price toward 0.8%/mo would move this ZIP toward a cash-flow story. inventory, +2.6% YoY, is the number to watch.
The median listing price is down 1.1% YoY while the median home got down 2.9% bigger, so value per square foot is down 3.1%.
Min/max come from the active-listing pool; the median comes from Realtor's separate listing set — the two are not subsets of each other, so the median's position relative to the tiles above should not be read literally.
At the median, a $639K purchase rents for $2,192/mo: 0.34% of price per month against the 1% rule's 1.00%.
Not shown: 7 BR (sale only, no matching rent).
Sales here take about 33 days longer to go under contract than rentals (median across 2 property types).
Not shown: Apartment (rented here, not sold), Condo (sold here, not rented).
U.S. Census ACS characteristics for ZIP 80129 itself, not its parent county.
Renters hold 31.0% of this ZIP's 12,510 occupied households, on a median household income of $142K.
| Measure | ZIP 80129 | Douglas County | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median Household Income | $142K | $150K | -$8K |
| Below Poverty Level | 3.3% | 3.8% | -0.5% |
| Median Age | 41.20 | 39.60 | +1.60 |
| Total Population | 30,223 | 377,150 | -- |
| Avg Household Size | 2.41 | 2.69 | -0.28 |
| Owner-Occupied | 69.0% | 77.4% | -8.4% |
| Worked From Home | 32.9% | 30.5% | +2.4% |
| Mean Commute | 23.80 | 27.10 | -3.30 |
Higher or lower is not itself good or bad — it describes the neighborhood, not the investment.
ZIP-level figures come from ZIP Code Tabulation Areas, which approximate but do not exactly match USPS ZIP codes. A missing value is suppressed or unavailable at this sample size, not zero. Estimates for 2019–2020 use the 2010 ZCTA boundaries and 2021–2024 the 2020 ones, so a step between those two years may be a boundary change rather than real movement.
County population is up 2.4% to 377,150: residents under 18 are down 0.2% and those 65 and over are up 6.4%.
County median household income is $150K, 3.8% of residents are below the poverty level, 30.5% work from home.