Want a risk-free California home purchase? Own it for 12 years.

If buying a home "works out over time" – how long must you wait so a purchase isn't a money-loser?

“Numerology” tries to find reality within various measurements of economic and real estate trends.

Buzz: If buying a home “works out over time” – how long must you wait so a purchase isn’t a money-loser?

Source: My trusty spreadsheet was filled with Case-Shiller home-price indexes for Los Angeles-Orange County, San Francisco, and San Diego dating to 1987 – with an average of this trio’s performance used as a benchmark for California housing values. Case-Shiller’s US index was tracked as well.

Fuzzy math: History says owning a home for at least 12 years yielded loss-free results.

Top Line

The assumption was “works out over time” translates to no price declines in a given period. Let me start by using one-year ownership as an example.

California prices fell in 30% of the 12-month periods since 1987. Now owning one year did produce an average 6% gain – ranging from a 28% loss in 2008 to a 28% gain in 2004.

And, by the way, US homes were down in just 18% of 1-year periods.

So clearly one year isn’t enough of an ownership length to be a “risk-free” purchase.

Nitty Gritty

I won’t bore you with every year’s worth of results, so I’ll just fast-forward to what happened with four years of ownership.

Since 1987, owning a California home for 48 months had 27% losing periods. Not much of an improvement.

The average 4-year result was a 27% gain.– ranging from a 38% drop through 2009 to a 94% surge through 2006.  US homes had 13% down 4-year periods.

Next, look at 8-year ownership. History shows 21% losing periods but an average gain of 61% – ranging from a 24% tumble through 2012 to a 214% upswing through 2005. US homes had 14% down 8-year periods.

Even owning for a decade wasn’t risk-free since 1987. Over 10 years, there were still 9% losers – though the average result was an 80% gain. Worst was down 7% through 2016. Best was up 250% through 2006. US homes had 5% down 10-year periods.

A Californian had to own for 12 years to have no declining periods since 1987. The average gain was 94% – ranging from up 6% through 2017 to up 240% through 2006. US homes, too, had no down 12-year periods.

Bottom line

One could argue that the future won’t look like the past 36 years that featured a horrific market crash of the 2000s and housing malaise that ran for much of the 1990s. The purported shortage of housing might limit the odds of such home-price calamities.

Conversely, the next 35 years will unlikely see home-price drivers such as stunning California growth – economically or population-wise – or mortgage rates going from double-digits to under 3%.

Yes, past performance is no guarantee of future returns. But those who ignore history often learn tough lessons.

PS: When I used the California Association of Realtors’ median home price, dating to 1990, for the same math it took 14 years for risk-free ownership. Average gain was 90% ranging from a 4% gain through 2020 to a 221% surge through 2023.

Jonathan Lansner is business columnist for the Southern California News Group. He can be reached at jlansner@scng.com