TOP 10 Countries by Housing Price-to-Income Ratio in Major Cities (2025)
Why the housing price-to-income ratio is a fast “stress test” for affordability in 2025
The housing price-to-income ratio compares the price of a typical home (or an apartment) with the annual income of a typical household. When the ratio is in the low single digits, ownership is usually within reach for middle-income families. When it rises into double digits, ownership can become a long, debt-heavy climb — or simply unrealistic without help from savings, remittances, or inheritance.
How to read this ranking
The figures below represent an estimated number of years of median after-tax household income required to buy a ~90 m² apartment in the city centre at prevailing asking prices, assuming a full cash purchase. In practice, real affordability depends on mortgage terms, down payments, informal income, and whether transactions are financed by diaspora savings or informal credit.
Ratios are rounded and should be read as indicative (especially for conflict-affected economies). A high ratio can reflect speculative demand — but it can also reflect structural land scarcity, weak formal mortgage markets, or large gaps between formal wages and the sources of housing finance.
Top 10 countries where major-city housing looks most stretched vs local incomes
Syrian Arab Republic
Major city: Damascus
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 102
Extreme mismatch between measured formal incomes and hard-currency housing values in the core city.
Cuba
Major city: Havana
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 49
Scarcity of well-located urban stock and tight foreign-currency conditions lift prices far above official wages.
Cameroon
Major city: Yaoundé / Douala
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 47
Fast urbanisation plus land and permitting frictions push construction and land costs ahead of incomes.
Ethiopia
Major city: Addis Ababa
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 43
Limited formal mortgage penetration and a constrained supply pipeline keep ownership concentrated.
Nepal
Major city: Kathmandu
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 37
Remittance-linked demand and land scarcity can move prices faster than recorded household incomes.
Sri Lanka
Major city: Colombo
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 36
Years of credit-fuelled building met with macro stress; affordability remains stretched despite cooling.
Hong Kong SAR, China
Major city: Hong Kong
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 29
A high-income, global market where structural land scarcity and investor demand keep ratios elevated.
Viet Nam
Major city: Hanoi / Ho Chi Minh City
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 27
Urban migration and investor demand outpace affordable supply in the largest metros.
China
Major city: Tier-1 cities (e.g., Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen)
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 25
A long boom has eased in some segments, but top-tier city housing still trades at a premium vs wages.
Philippines
Major city: Metro Manila
Price-to-income ratio: ≈ 24
Remittance- and services-driven demand meets infrastructure and land constraints in the core metro.
Table 1. Top 10 countries by housing price-to-income ratio in major cities (latest 2024–2025)
| Rank | Country (major city) | Price-to-income ratio |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Syrian Arab Republic (Damascus) | ≈ 102 |
| 2 | Cuba (Havana) | ≈ 49 |
| 3 | Cameroon (Yaoundé / Douala) | ≈ 47 |
| 4 | Ethiopia (Addis Ababa) | ≈ 43 |
| 5 | Nepal (Kathmandu) | ≈ 37 |
| 6 | Sri Lanka (Colombo) | ≈ 36 |
| 7 | Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong) | ≈ 29 |
| 8 | Viet Nam (Hanoi / Ho Chi Minh City) | ≈ 27 |
| 9 | China (Tier-1 cities) | ≈ 25 |
| 10 | Philippines (Metro Manila) | ≈ 24 |
*Interpreted as years of median after-tax household income required to buy a ~90 m² city-centre apartment at current asking prices (cash purchase assumption). Thresholds above ~5 are commonly described as “severely unaffordable” in benchmark affordability frameworks.
Chart 1. Housing price-to-income ratio in major cities (Top 10)
Chart fallback (data list)
- Syrian Arab Republic (Damascus): ≈ 102
- Cuba (Havana): ≈ 49
- Cameroon (Yaoundé / Douala): ≈ 47
- Ethiopia (Addis Ababa): ≈ 43
- Nepal (Kathmandu): ≈ 37
- Sri Lanka (Colombo): ≈ 36
- Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong): ≈ 29
- Viet Nam (Hanoi / Ho Chi Minh City): ≈ 27
- China (Tier-1 cities): ≈ 25
- Philippines (Metro Manila): ≈ 24
These values are a practical “snapshot” and should be interpreted as directional indicators. City-level affordability can change quickly with currency swings, policy shifts, and supply pipeline changes.
Data and methodology (what is measured, how, and what can distort it)
There is no single global authority that publishes a fully harmonised, city-level affordability ratio for every country. This ranking is built around the latest available price-to-income ratio snapshots from large city-cost datasets, complemented by affordability frameworks and long-run housing indicators used by international organisations. The “major city” is the largest or economically dominant metro, where migration and job concentration typically amplify price pressures.
Conceptually, the ratio is straightforward: median home (or apartment) price divided by median household income. In practice, comparability is challenged by differences in housing types (condo vs detached), transaction coverage (asking vs sale price), household size, tax regimes, and the share of income earned informally. For conflict-affected or sanction-constrained economies, both prices and incomes can be difficult to measure reliably, and “hard-currency pricing” can detach housing values from formal wages.
This page treats values as indicative, rounds them for readability, and focuses on cross-country contrasts rather than false precision. Key limitations include: crowdsourced inputs and sample bias in city-cost platforms; under-reported or unstable incomes where informality is large; structural land scarcity and planning constraints that are not “bubbles” but still create permanent affordability stress; and the possibility that remittances or diaspora savings fund purchases in ways local wage statistics do not capture.
Insights (what stands out in 2025)
Three patterns emerge from the Top 10. First, the most extreme ratios are not confined to rich economies: several high-stress markets sit in lower- to middle-income contexts where formal mortgage markets are shallow and supply bottlenecks are severe. Second, the same “high ratio” can represent different mechanisms: a wealthy global hub may be expensive because of land scarcity and investor demand, while a lower-income capital may look unaffordable because measured wages lag behind the sources of housing finance (remittances, informal credit, hard-currency savings). Third, fast-growing Asian metros show how urbanisation and middle-class formation can outpace affordable supply when land release, zoning reform, or transit-led densification lag.
Used carefully, the ratio is a signal of pressure — not a universal diagnosis. It is strongest when paired with rent-to-income, vacancy rates, mortgage-to-income, and construction pipeline data.
What this means for the reader (practical interpretation)
For households, a very high ratio usually implies a heavier reliance on family support, multi-earner households, longer saving horizons, or relocation to cheaper submarkets. For renters, it often points to rising rent pressure unless supply expands quickly. For migrants and remote workers, the metric helps frame whether a pay rise is likely to be “absorbed” by housing costs in the target city. For investors and planners, persistent extremes can indicate a structural supply imbalance and increased sensitivity to rate shocks, policy tightening, or macro instability.
FAQ (price-to-income ratio, explained in plain language)
Why focus on the biggest city instead of national averages?
Affordability stress typically concentrates where jobs, universities, and infrastructure are densest. National averages can hide the fact that a capital city is far less affordable than the rest of the country — and that’s often where household formation pressure is highest.
Does a very high ratio automatically mean a housing bubble?
Not necessarily. A bubble implies prices are detached from fundamentals and likely to correct. A high ratio can also be structural — driven by land scarcity, planning constraints, limited new supply, or a permanent inflow of external capital. It is best treated as a “warning light” that needs more context.
Why can low-income countries show ratios above 30–40?
In many places, formal wages understate the resources used to buy housing. Remittances, informal earnings, diaspora savings, or hard-currency holdings can fund transactions. If official incomes are low or unstable while housing is priced in scarce currency, the measured ratio can explode.
Why is Hong Kong still near the top even though it is high-income?
A high-income city can still have a very high ratio when developable land is scarce, planning constraints are tight, and investor demand is global. Even strong incomes can be outpaced by asset-price dynamics and supply limits.
Is price-to-income better than comparing prices in US dollars?
Usually yes for affordability. Dollar prices mix up exchange rates and local wages. Price-to-income compares housing costs with what households actually earn locally, which is closer to the lived affordability problem.
What other metric should I check alongside this ratio?
Pair it with rent-to-income, mortgage rates and typical loan terms, new housing completions and permits, vacancy rates, and household debt-to-income. Together, these show whether stress comes from tight supply, expensive credit, weak incomes, or speculative demand.
How the price-to-income ratio changed since 2015 — and why the drivers differ by market
City-level affordability evolves through a mix of income growth, credit conditions, supply responsiveness, and land constraints. Since around 2015, many markets have seen the ratio climb as prices outpaced wages; a smaller set has been volatile due to currency shocks or conflict; and only a handful has stabilised after corrections or policy tightening.
How to interpret “change bands”
For data-poor or conflict-affected economies, forcing precise point estimates can be misleading. The table below uses broad, qualitative bands to summarise direction and approximate scale of change since 2015, and highlights the mechanism that most plausibly explains the movement.
Table 2. Change in housing price-to-income ratio, 2015–2024/2025 (qualitative)
| Country | 2015–2024/25 change (band) | Main drivers (summary) |
|---|---|---|
| Syrian Arab Republic | Highly volatile; overall ↑ (hard to quantify) | Conflict, displacement and currency collapse distort both prices and measured incomes; formal incomes lag behind hard-currency house values in Damascus. |
| Cuba | ↑ ~ +40–60% vs 2015 | Gradual liberalisation of private property markets, limited new supply and tight foreign-currency conditions raise the value of well-located stock relative to official wages. |
| Cameroon | ↑ ~ +30–50% | Rapid urbanisation in Douala and Yaoundé, land administration bottlenecks and construction costs outpacing household income growth. |
| Ethiopia | ↑ ~ +30–50% (with recent volatility) | State-led condominium programmes and later macro stress interact; land lease systems and limited formal mortgages keep ownership concentrated. |
| Nepal | ↑ ~ +40–70% | Post-earthquake reconstruction, remittance-fuelled demand and restricted urban land availability drive Kathmandu prices faster than recorded incomes. |
| Sri Lanka | ↑ in 2010s; stabilising or slightly ↓ after 2022 crisis | Credit-fuelled construction and tourism-linked demand raised Colombo prices; crisis-era depreciation and higher rates cooled the market, but affordability remains stretched. |
| Hong Kong SAR, China | Stayed very high; modest ↓ from peak | Structural land scarcity and global investor demand; cooling measures, higher rates and new supply eased the ratio slightly but not to traditional affordability thresholds. |
| Viet Nam | ↑ ~ +30–60% | Fast urban migration and investor demand; limited affordable supply in major metros pushed the ratio steadily upward. |
| China (Tier-1 cities) | ↑ through late 2010s; stabilisation or slight ↓ in early 2020s | Long boom driven by credit and speculative demand; tightening and slower growth flattened or reduced ratios in some segments, but levels remain high in top-tier cities. |
| Philippines | ↑ ~ +20–40% | Demand from remittances and services-sector workers plus infrastructure bottlenecks and land constraints lifted condo prices faster than average wages. |
Note: Bands are indicative. They are meant to show direction and relative scale, not produce a precise percentage estimate for each city.
Chart 2. Price-to-income ratio vs approximate GDP per capita (current US$)
This scatter plot illustrates a key point: severe housing unaffordability can occur both in low- and middle-income economies (often via supply constraints, weak formal finance, and income measurement gaps) and in wealthy global hubs (often via land scarcity and external capital flows).
Chart fallback (data list)
- Syria: GDPpc ≈ $0.5k, ratio ≈ 102
- Cuba: GDPpc ≈ $9.5k, ratio ≈ 49
- Cameroon: GDPpc ≈ $1.7k, ratio ≈ 47
- Ethiopia: GDPpc ≈ $1.1k, ratio ≈ 43
- Nepal: GDPpc ≈ $1.4k, ratio ≈ 37
- Sri Lanka: GDPpc ≈ $4.0k, ratio ≈ 36
- Hong Kong SAR: GDPpc ≈ $50.0k, ratio ≈ 29
- Viet Nam: GDPpc ≈ $4.2k, ratio ≈ 27
- China: GDPpc ≈ $12.5k, ratio ≈ 25
- Philippines: GDPpc ≈ $3.8k, ratio ≈ 24
GDP per capita values shown here are coarse, illustrative placements (rounded, order-of-magnitude) intended to support the visual pattern rather than act as precise country estimates for a specific year.
Interpretation: what persistent “double-digit” price-to-income ratios imply
When a major city sits at a price-to-income ratio in the high double digits for years, affordability becomes a structural constraint — not a short-lived shock. The impact is usually visible in delayed household formation, greater reliance on multi-earner families, rapid rental-market expansion, and a growing divide between those with access to capital (assets, remittances, family support) and those relying mainly on wages.
The Top 10 in this snapshot combines three distinct affordability stories:
- Extreme mismatch markets where formal income measurement and housing finance diverge (often alongside currency stress or conflict).
- Fast-urbanising metros where supply responsiveness lags demand (land release, zoning, infrastructure, construction capacity).
- Global hubs where structural land scarcity and investor demand keep asset prices high even with strong local incomes.
Policy takeaways (a practical playbook)
The right response depends on the mechanism behind the ratio. A one-size-fits-all approach can backfire — for example, restricting credit in a city that is primarily supply-constrained can reduce construction and worsen the shortage. A more robust approach is to combine supply, demand, and data reforms.
- Unlock supply where it is structurally constrained: serviced land, faster permitting, predictable zoning, transit-led densification, and clear property rights.
- Target affordability rather than “average prices”: expand rental and social housing, support incremental building, and link subsidies to verified income and household size.
- Stabilise housing finance: prudent mortgage regulation, transparent underwriting, and stress tests that prevent over-indebtedness as credit deepens.
- Reduce speculative pressure where it dominates: targeted taxes, vacancy measures, and macro-prudential tools — paired with credible supply pipelines.
- Fix the data layer: reliable income surveys, price indices, land registries, and building-permit pipelines are essential to diagnose the problem and track progress.
Open questions worth tracking in 2026
- Does new supply expand fast enough to stabilise rents, not just prices?
- Are affordability gains broad-based (median households) or concentrated in high-income segments?
- Do policy tools shift demand into productive investment rather than property as the primary store of wealth?
- Are income and housing statistics improving in coverage and transparency, especially where informality is large?
Sources (primary data and background)
-
Numbeo — Property Price to Income Ratio (country and city snapshots)https://www.numbeo.com/property-investment/
-
Demographia — International Housing Affordability Survey (benchmark affordability categories)https://www.demographia.com/
-
IMF — Global Housing Watch (price-to-income and related analytical work)https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/house-prices
-
OECD — Housing indicators (price-to-income, price-to-rent and analytical series)https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/housing.html
-
World Bank — World Development Indicators (GDP per capita / income context)https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD
-
UN Data — National accounts and macro context (supporting comparisons)https://data.un.org/
Update window: values referenced in this page are based on the latest available 2024–2025 snapshots in the sources above and are rounded for readability.
