San Francisco Bay Area Market Analysis
Bay Area Housing: Has inventory improved in 2026?
Updated August 18, 2026
Reviewed by:
Head of Growth at TurboHome
Head Agent, California · CalDRE #01997822
Inventory expanded across the Bay Area, with buyer relief concentrated in specific zones. San Jose and Greater SJ built the deepest supply cushion, while San Francisco remained comparatively tight.
TurboHome Market Analysis · San Francisco Bay Area · Updated August 18, 2026
The short version: The July 2026 regional chart shows 3,852 new listings and 2,873 closed sales, a gap of 979 homes. July closings normally fall from June. A five-year seasonality check and a closing-completeness test account for only part of the difference. Listings are still arriving faster than buyers are absorbing them, with the clearest buyer shift in Santa Clara County.
First, keep the geography straight
This report covers regional and zone-level results. Neighborhood analysis sits outside its scope. Our MLS methodology uses metric-specific zone sets, so each chart keeps its exact reporting geography.
| Area | Exact reporting scope | Metrics included |
|---|---|---|
| San Francisco | City and County of San Francisco | All four metrics |
| East Bay | TurboHome East Bay reporting zone; months of supply excludes Tri-Valley | All four metrics |
| Peninsula | TurboHome Peninsula reporting zone | All four metrics |
| San Jose | City of San Jose in Santa Clara County | All four metrics |
| Greater SJ | Santa Clara County excluding San Jose | All four metrics |
| Tri-Valley | Danville, San Ramon, Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore | Listing flow, months of supply |
Our inventory measures combine single-family homes, condos, and townhouses. A reliable property-type split was unavailable, so the charts present the combined residential market.
Inventory summary by zone
| Zone | New listings, Jan–Jul YoY | Sell-through 2025 to 2026 | Listings vs. closings, Jan 2025–Jul 2026 | Supply, Aug 2025 to Aug 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| San Jose | +22.9% | 94% to 70% (-25 pts) | +13% listings | 1.14 to 3.01 (+164%) |
| Greater SJ | +16.6% | 90% to 72% (-19 pts) | +14% listings | 1.08 to 2.94 (+172%) |
| Peninsula | +12.5% | 87% to 80% (-7 pts) | +9% listings | 1.48 to 1.82 (+23%) |
| San Francisco | +10.3% | 92% to 88% (-3 pts) | +3% listings | 1.61 to 1.12 (-30%) |
| East Bay | +7.3% | 86% to 79% (-7 pts) | +9% listings | 1.15 to 1.83 (+59%) |
| Tri-Valley | Unavailable | Unavailable | +13% listings | 0.97 to 2.21 (+128%) |
Four inventory signals, read together
Our MLS analysis compares four exact zone-level measures: new-listing growth, sell-through, cumulative listings versus closings, and months of supply.Each visual now sits beside its analysis, keeps the methodology-defined geography, and uses a fixed scale for that metric.
Monthly listings and closings, side by side
The aggregate line chart and six zone panels preserve the supplied January 2025 through July 2026 trend shapes. Red shows new listings, slate shows closed sales, and the shaded space makes the monthly inventory-building gap easy to see.
TL;DR: July 2026 ended with 3,852 new listings and 2,873 closed sales, a source-labeled gap of 979. The lines show how that split developed from January 2025.
Bay Area aggregate
Supplied regional series
TL;DR: New listings finished above closings in all six source-defined zones. Greater SJ had the largest cumulative gap, while San Francisco tracked closest.
San Jose
City of San Jose, Santa Clara County
Greater SJ
Santa Clara County excluding San Jose
Tri-Valley
Danville, San Ramon, Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore
Peninsula
Source-defined Peninsula zone
East Bay
Source-defined East Bay zone
San Francisco
City and County of San Francisco
Source: AnyProp licensed MLS feed and TurboHome analysis. The July 2026 aggregate endpoint is printed exactly. Digitized monthly points reproduce the chart shapes; printed labels carry the exact counts.
New listings grew fastest in San Jose
New-listing growth measures incoming supply alone. More homes arriving can create choice, while demand and sales velocity determine whether those homes build into usable inventory for buyers.
New-listing growth
San Jose posted the largest listing gain
January through July 2026 vs. January through July 2025
TL;DR: San Jose led at 22.9%. Greater SJ followed at 16.6%, while East Bay had the smallest included increase at 7.3%.
San Jose
City of San Jose, Santa Clara County
Greater SJ
Santa Clara County excluding San Jose
Peninsula
Source-defined Peninsula zone
San Francisco
City and County of San Francisco
East Bay
Source-defined East Bay zone
Source: AnyProp licensed MLS feed and supplied TurboHome inventory charts. Residential-for-sale listings include single-family homes, condos, and townhouses.
Metric geography varies by chart. Tri-Valley appears only where the dataset includes it. Exact active-listing counts were unavailable. Digitized monthly points reproduce the chart shapes; printed labels carry the exact source counts.
Sell-through fell across the supplied zones
Sell-through is closed sales as a share of new listings over the same January through July window. A lower rate means new listings arrived faster than buyers closed them.
Sell-through
A smaller share of new inventory closed
Closed sales as a share of new listings, January through July
TL;DR: Sell-through fell in every included zone. San Jose declined by 25 points, while San Francisco changed least at 3 points.
San Jose
-25 pts
City of San Jose, Santa Clara County
Greater SJ
-19 pts
Santa Clara County excluding San Jose
East Bay
-7 pts
Source-defined East Bay zone
Peninsula
-7 pts
Source-defined Peninsula zone
San Francisco
-3 pts
City and County of San Francisco
Source: AnyProp licensed MLS feed and supplied TurboHome inventory charts. Residential-for-sale listings include single-family homes, condos, and townhouses.
Metric geography varies by chart. Tri-Valley appears only where the dataset includes it. Exact active-listing counts were unavailable. Digitized monthly points reproduce the chart shapes; printed labels carry the exact source counts.
Listing flow built a July gap of 979
Our regional July 2026 data shows 3,852 new listings and 2,873 closed sales. The zone comparison places listings ahead of closings by 14% in Greater SJ, 13% in San Jose, 13% in Tri-Valley, 9% in Peninsula, 9% in East Bay, and 3% in San Francisco.
Listings versus closings
Listings outpaced closings in all six zones
Cumulative new listings vs. closed sales, January 2025 through July 2026
TL;DR: Greater SJ had the largest listings surplus at 14%. San Jose and Tri-Valley followed at 13%, while San Francisco had the smallest gap at 3%.
Greater SJ
Santa Clara County excluding San Jose
San Jose
City of San Jose, Santa Clara County
Tri-Valley
Danville, San Ramon, Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore
Peninsula
Source-defined Peninsula zone
East Bay
Source-defined East Bay zone
San Francisco
City and County of San Francisco
Source: AnyProp licensed MLS feed and supplied TurboHome inventory charts. Residential-for-sale listings include single-family homes, condos, and townhouses.
Metric geography varies by chart. Tri-Valley appears only where the dataset includes it. Exact active-listing counts were unavailable. Digitized monthly points reproduce the chart shapes; printed labels carry the exact source counts.
Why fewer closings matter
A lower July closing count could reflect normal summer seasonality, incomplete reporting, or weaker absorption. The historical pattern confirms a seasonal decline. The completeness check leaves a meaningful absorption gap after likely revisions.
| Year | June closings | July closings | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 3,868 | 3,135 | -19% |
| 2023 | 3,395 | 2,853 | -16% |
| 2024 | 3,322 | 3,285 | -1% |
| 2025 | 2,915 | 2,836 | -3% |
| 2026 | 3,255 | 2,873 | -12% |
July ran below June in all five years. The 2026 decline of 12% sits inside that historical range, so the direction is consistent with normal seasonality.
The separate completeness test found only 121 Bay Area listings that went pending in May or June and still remained pending. Those are the transactions most likely to revise the July count. Even if every one eventually lands in July, closings would rise to about 2,994. That is still below June’s 3,255 closings and well below July’s 3,852 new listings.
That makes the inventory signal more durable. July may revise upward by roughly 4%. Across the full January through July window, the potential revision equals about 0.7% of total closings and leaves the sell-through result intact: new supply accumulated faster than completed buyer demand.
The 877 listings that went pending in July point toward August and September closings. They sit outside the July closing window. Normal conversion could narrow the gap later while leaving the January through July finding intact.
Months of supply split the region
Months of supply divides active listings by average monthly closings. It measures accumulated stock relative to sales pace, incorporating both incoming listings and completed sales.
Tri-Valley shows why the distinction matters. Its listings exceeded closings by 13% across our January 2025 through July 2026 window, while months of supply rose 128%, from 0.97 to 2.21. Those measures point to more buyer room. The new-listing-growth dataset excludes Tri-Valley.
Months of supply
Santa Clara County moved closest to balance
August 2025 vs. August 2026
TL;DR: Months of supply climbed to 3.01 in San Jose and 2.94 in Greater SJ. San Francisco moved the other way, falling 30% to 1.12 months.
San Jose
+164%
City of San Jose, Santa Clara County
Greater SJ
+172%
Santa Clara County excluding San Jose
Tri-Valley
+128%
Danville, San Ramon, Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore
East Bay
+59%
Source-defined East Bay zone excluding Tri-Valley
Peninsula
+23%
Source-defined Peninsula zone
San Francisco
-30%
City and County of San Francisco
Source: AnyProp licensed MLS feed and supplied TurboHome inventory charts. Residential-for-sale listings include single-family homes, condos, and townhouses.
Metric geography varies by chart. Tri-Valley appears only where the dataset includes it. Exact active-listing counts were unavailable. Digitized monthly points reproduce the chart shapes; printed labels carry the exact source counts.
Supporting signals moved in opposite directions
Our MLS research found three supporting signals in San Jose, Greater SJ, and Tri-Valley. Median sale prices fell 4.5%, 3.7%, and 3.5%, respectively. Days on market rose from 17 to 20 in San Jose, 18 to 23 in Greater SJ, and 17 to 19 in Tri-Valley. The share of closings above asking also fell in all three zones.
San Francisco moved the other way. Its median sale price rose from $1,404,000 to $1,600,000, days on market fell from 18 to 13, and the share of closings above asking rose from 57.6% to 70.9%.
Our MLS analysis confirms these movements. Diverging supply and demand conditions offer one possible explanation, while the available data cannot identify a causal driver.
Put the data to work
What this means if you’re buying or selling
Buying in Santa Clara County
More choice is turning into negotiating room
San Jose and Greater SJ combined strong listing growth with large sell-through declines and the highest August 2026 months of supply in the supplied dataset.
Buying in Tri-Valley
Read demand separately from new supply
Tri-Valley listings exceeded closings by 13% across January 2025 through July 2026, and August supply rose to 2.21 months. The new-listing-growth dataset excludes Tri-Valley.
Buying in San Francisco
Treat tight inventory differently
San Francisco had the smallest listings-versus-closings gap and was the only supplied zone where months of supply fell, from 1.61 to 1.12.
Selling
Price for local market conditions
Inventory conditions diverged sharply. Santa Clara County zones built more supply, while San Francisco remained tighter. Sellers should price against the exact local comp set.
Quick Q&A
Is the Bay Area a buyer’s market right now?
Conditions vary by zone. Every zone in the months-of-supply table remained below six months. San Jose and Greater SJ moved toward balance while San Francisco tightened.
Which zone had the most supply relative to demand?
San Jose had 3.01 months of supply in August 2026, followed by Greater SJ at 2.94 months.
Where did new listings grow fastest?
San Jose led at 22.9% for January through July 2026 versus the same period in 2025. Greater SJ followed at 16.6%.
What does sell-through rate mean here?
It is closed sales as a share of new listings over the same January through July window. A lower rate means listings arrived faster than buyers closed them.
Does July reporting lag explain the listing gap?
No. Only 121 listings that went pending in May or June remained pending in the completeness check. Even if all 121 later land in July, closings would reach about 2,994, still below June’s 3,255 and July’s 3,852 new listings.
Bottom line
Bay Area inventory improved in 2026, but the practical win depends on where you are looking. New listings outpaced closings across the region, and the July gap remains meaningful even after accounting for normal seasonality and possible reporting revisions. San Jose and Greater SJ offer the clearest evidence of growing buyer leverage, while San Francisco still demands a faster, more competitive approach.
Use the zone data as a starting point, then price the decision against the homes actually competing in your city and neighborhood. TurboHome can run that local MLS analysis for the address or search area you care about.
Local numbers for your market
Want the same breakdown for your neighborhood?
TurboHome pulls this same MLS data for every California market we operate in. If you’re deciding when to list, how to price, or whether a specific offer makes sense against what’s actually closing nearby, we can run the numbers for your address.
Get a Free Comp AnalysisAbout Michael Domalewski
Client Success & Community Lead at TurboHome
Michael Domalewski is a community-building and growth professional with an extensive background managing online communities. He is involved with every aspect of the homebuyer journey - sharing vital information to educate prospective homebuyers on commission, savings & best practices.
View Michael's profileAbout Vinura Abeysundara
Head of Growth at TurboHome
Vinura Abeysundara is a real estate and growth professional with experience scaling homebuying platforms across Canada and the United States. Formerly Head of Growth at Zown, he now works with TurboHome and writes about homebuyer savings, flat-fee real estate, commissions, and technology in real estate.
View Vinura's profileAbout Kevin Kretzmer
Head Agent, California
Kevin Kretzmer leads TurboHome's California agent team and reviews California and national buyer guidance for practical brokerage accuracy.
View Kevin's profile