California cap rates by region
A cap rate is annual net operating income divided by price, before financing. These benchmarks help choose comparables; the rent roll, operating costs and condition determine whether a particular acquisition earns that rate.
Most reported averages are wider than a year ago
| Report geography | Q3 2025 | Q2 2026 | Q3 2026 | Annual change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bay Area | 5.5% | 5.8% | 5.9% | +40 bps |
| Los Angeles | 5.5% | 5.8% | 5.9% | +40 bps |
| Orange County | 4.5% | 5.0% | 4.7% | +20 bps |
| San Diego | 5.0% | 4.8% | 4.9% | -10 bps |
| Inland Empire | 5.7% | 6.2% | 5.9% | +20 bps |
| Sacramento | 5.5% | 6.3% | 6.7% | +120 bps |
100 basis points (bps) = one percentage point. Geography follows each publisher report: Bay Area is broader than San Francisco; Inland Empire spans Riverside and San Bernardino markets. Public summaries do not disclose cap-rate sample sizes, weighting or NOI conventions. Treat small changes cautiously. Linked reports provide the underlying tables; accessed October 18, 2026.
Quarterly compression can coexist with annual expansion. Orange County and Inland Empire each tightened 30 bps from Q2, yet remained above Q3 2025. Calling either market simply “compressing” hides the comparison period.
Why another source may show a different cap rate
Transactions, models, broker surveys and asking prices measure different things. K2’s Los Angeles apartment median was 5.8% for reported closed-sale caps over October 2025–September 2026; its modeled Q3 benchmark was 5.2%. That comparison cannot be substituted for Kidder’s quarterly average. See K2’s filters and methodology.
Several reports here use CoStar. Multiple brokerage logos do not mean independent underlying datasets. None of these figures is calculated by dividing a county rent index by a home-value index. The California directory’s gross-ratio screen serves a separate purpose.
The local story behind the regional number
For deeper local news, sale evidence and property-level decisions, read our dedicated analyses: Los Angeles cap rates · Riverside cap rates · San Diego cap rates · Sacramento cap rates · San Francisco cap rates.
Each regional reading below separates what was reported from what it could mean for underwriting. Neighborhood discussions identify which assumptions to test. A regional rate is not assigned to a neighborhood without sale evidence.
| Region | Vacancy | Vacancy change, YoY | Asking rent, YoY | Units under construction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bay Area | 3.8% | -100 bps | +7.7% | 19,156 |
| Los Angeles | 5.4% | +20 bps | +0.6% | 24,325 |
| Orange County | 3.9% | 0 bps | +2.4% | 7,454 |
| San Diego | 5.0% | -30 bps | +1.4% | 12,206 |
| Inland Empire | 5.3% | -50 bps | +1.7% | 5,729 |
| Sacramento | 6.1% | -40 bps | +0.8% | 3,431 |
Asking rent is not effective rent after concessions or collected rent from existing tenants. Construction is a pipeline stock, not quarterly deliveries. A change in regional vacancy does not establish a subject property’s collection loss.
Bay Area: stronger leasing has not yet meant lower cap rates
Kidder’s Q3 report combines 7.7% annual asking-rent growth and a 100-bp vacancy improvement with a 40-bp increase in average cap rate. Its construction pipeline grew 28% year over year. Better operations and tougher pricing can occur together.
San Francisco: separate market rents on vacant units from legally attainable rent on occupied units. A rent-recovery thesis cannot simply reprice the entire rent roll. Use the San Francisco NOI guide to distinguish county indexes from a building’s income.
Oakland, Peninsula and South Bay: the report identifies future projects around Lake Merritt BART, Redwood City and North San Jose. Match competing deliveries to unit type and commute area, rather than treating the Bay Area pipeline as equally relevant everywhere. Editorial view: stronger leasing supports NOI, but buying on assumed cap compression still adds a second, unproven source of return.
Los Angeles: modest rent growth leaves little room for expense surprises
Kidder reports 0.6% annual asking-rent growth, 5.4% vacancy and a 5.9% average cap rate. Vacancy is slightly higher than a year earlier. That combination offers less operating cushion than the Bay Area recovery.
Westside versus central LA: use the actual closed-sale clusters below before assuming a coastal premium applies to Hollywood or Koreatown. Separate low in-place rents from a feasible, timed path to higher income. Two similar buildings can have different realizable NOI because of tenancy and capital work.
City West, Crenshaw and Long Beach: Kidder identifies substantial projects scheduled for 2027 in these areas. For a renovation exit, compare the improved unit’s effective rent with that future competition. Editorial view: use a stable-cap base case and explicit expense stress; a low asking cap is difficult to justify solely with broad rent growth.

Orange County: tighter pricing, with supply concentrated in Irvine
Kidder’s 4.7% average is the lowest of this six-region set. Vacancy stayed at 3.9% year over year, asking rents rose 2.4%, and under-construction units increased 6.8%. Quarterly cap compression is encouraging, but the annual comparison remains wider.
Irvine Spectrum: the report lists 1,858 units at Discovery Park targeting Q2 2027. A regional vacancy average cannot establish how a nearby lease-up will price concessions. Review move-in incentives, competing floor plans and delivery timing.
Anaheim and Santa Ana: evaluate older apartment acquisitions on buyer expenses and actual rent collections before borrowing Irvine assumptions. Editorial view: a tight entry cap puts more weight on durable income and exit discipline. A 50-bp widening has a larger percentage effect on value at a low starting cap, with NOI held constant. The county overview adds broader housing context.
San Diego: annual compression, with a near-term supply test
Kidder’s Q3 average is 4.9%, 10 bps below a year earlier but 10 bps above Q2. Vacancy improved to 5.0%; asking rents rose 1.4% annually. The construction pipeline declined 17.3%, yet still contains 12,206 units.
Mission Valley: the report lists Riverwalk and Avalon projects targeting 2028. A shorter holding period can still encounter the marketing and preleasing of future competitors. Test whether an assumed renovation premium survives a new-build alternative.
Downtown versus North County: do not transplant a downtown sale or the regional average to a smaller suburban property. Match building scale, parking, concessions and recurring maintenance. Editorial view: improving absorption supports occupancy; it does not automatically provide enough effective-rent growth to overcome insurance, tax and repair increases. Treat further compression as upside until comparable sales support it.
Inland Empire: better occupancy, different risks across the two counties
Kidder’s Q3 report shows a 5.9% average cap, 5.3% vacancy and 1.7% annual asking-rent growth. Vacancy improved 50 bps year over year while the construction pipeline contracted 15.2%. Pricing tightened from Q2 but remains wider than a year earlier.
Chino Hills and western commuter markets: compare the subject with the same commute and amenity alternatives. County lines alone are a weak filter for a renter choosing between nearby communities.
Riverside, San Bernardino and the High Desert: rebuild collections, turnover costs and maintenance for the specific asset. A wider cap must compensate for a verified risk, not merely look higher than Orange County’s. Editorial view: lower future supply can support leasing, but the test is whether effective rents and expenses improve together. Underwrite Riverside and San Bernardino separately before using the combined regional benchmark.
Sacramento: the widest regional average is not automatically the best deal
Kidder reports a 6.7% cap rate, up 120 bps annually, alongside improving vacancy and 0.8% asking-rent growth. Under-construction units fell 33.8%. Its average sale price per unit rose sharply at the same time; changes in the traded mix prevent a simple “all properties appreciated” conclusion.
Natomas and Elk Grove: the report lists Marlowe Natomas and Laguna Main deliveries targeting 2027. Use their location and timing when testing a rent-growth or renovation plan, rather than applying the region’s shrinking pipeline to every competing set.
Central Sacramento versus West Sacramento: verify the actual municipality, ordinance and flood-insurance requirements. A metro comparison does not erase jurisdiction or parcel risk. Editorial view: recovering occupancy offers a plausible NOI path, but the unusually large cap move needs comparable-sales confirmation before it becomes an acquisition discount or an exit assumption.

Los Angeles apartment cap rates by submarket
The following selected clusters add closed-sale evidence beneath the regional average. They are not citywide quotes or a ranking of expected returns.
| Submarket cluster | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | Oct 2025–Sep 2026 | Change* | Total sales, latest year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beach Communities | 4.3% | 4.3% | 0 bps | 30 |
| Pasadena | 4.4% | 5.2% | +80 bps | 35 |
| Hollywood | 5.3% | 5.7% | +40 bps | 59 |
| Koreatown | 5.8% | 6.1% | +30 bps | 63 |
| Long Beach / Ports | 5.8% | 6.2% | +40 bps | 136 |
| Greater Inglewood | 6.0% | 6.7% | +70 bps | 108 |
Source: K2’s Q3 2026 analysis, table 4. Apartment sales ≥$1 million and ≥5,000 SF. Each cluster had ≥10 sales and ≥8 reported caps in both years. The last column counts all qualifying sales, not reported caps. *Changes calculated from displayed rounded rates; “0 bps” can conceal a small underlying change. Selected six of 22 qualifying clusters; not repeat-sale or property-quality adjusted.
What this changes in a bid: choose a comparable cluster before choosing a cap. Then reconcile condition, unit mix, tenancy and income basis. An older, regulated building with deferred repairs is not made comparable to a renovated asset merely by sharing a ZIP code.
For an illustrative $100,000 NOI, a 50-bp increase from 5.0% to 5.5% reduces indicated value by $181,818. If the seller’s NOI also assumes rent increases that the buyer cannot realize, both the numerator and denominator can move against the bid. Require the sale’s actual income basis before interpreting the spread as mispricing.
Central Valley: higher yields need a different operating test
The latest local reports verified for this edition are Q2 2026. They stay separate from the Q3 regional series because the period and reporting basis differ.
| Market | Cap rate | Vacancy | Construction units |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fresno | 6.41% | 4.50% | 63 |
| Bakersfield | 7.00% | 5.20% | 892 |
Published market indicators, not independently verified transaction medians. The reports do not provide cap-rate sample sizes or a standardized NOI definition. Precision follows the source and does not imply property-level accuracy. The publisher’s older Q1 overview and local pages differed slightly; this table uses only the newer local Q2 reports.
Fresno and Clovis: limited construction does not eliminate turnover risk
Lee describes a stable market with a much smaller construction pipeline and modest rent gains. Its reported 12-month absorption fell from 444 units in Q1 to 202 in Q2. Limited new supply helps, but slower absorption argues against assuming every vacancy can be filled immediately at a higher rent.
Editorial view: separate workforce rentals, student-oriented units and newer communities by their actual tenants and turnover calendar. Obtain a neighborhood rent and collection sample for Fresno or Clovis instead of assigning either city the regional 6.41%. A lower purchase price does not make insurance, systems replacement or professional management cost less per unit.
Bakersfield: the pipeline matters more than the “7%” headline
Lee’s Q2 cap rate was 7.00%, down from 7.10% in Q1, while vacancy edged up to 5.20%. The report identifies Park Center at Seven Oaks among the projects expected to deliver in late 2026.
Editorial view: compare west-side lease-up competition with the subject’s unit type and attainable rent. For an older building elsewhere in the market, collection history and repair invoices may matter more than a new project across town. A 7% acquisition cap can still produce weak financed cash flow if its NOI excludes buyer expenses or major recurring work.
Coverage boundary: no current, comparable neighborhood-cap series was verified for Fresno, Bakersfield, Stockton or Modesto in this edition. Stockton, Modesto, the Central Coast and rural counties need local sale evidence; neighboring rates are not substituted. Browse the county directory for broader housing context.
Will California cap rates compress or expand?
The defensible base case is selective stabilization, with substantial property-level dispersion. That is RentalCalcs’ editorial interpretation of the sources, not a measured statewide forecast. Recent quarterly tightening in Orange County and Inland Empire is evidence to watch; annual expansion in five of the six regional averages argues against declaring a broad compression cycle.
“income will be even more important for total returns in 2026 and beyond.”
CBRE, 2026 midyear capital-markets outlook
CBRE’s midyear forecast moved from expecting 2026 compression to largely stable cap rates, with incremental compression anticipated in 2027. Its August expectations analysis also became more cautious. These national views provide financing context; they do not predict a Sacramento exit cap or an LA neighborhood’s next sale.
Lee’s supply analysis describes a sequence: occupancy can recover before concessions retreat and rents regain pricing power. Existing lease-ups can compete for tenants even as deliveries slow. The California implication is conditional: a smaller pipeline helps only if local demand absorbs the units already available.
Compression case
Long-term borrowing costs ease, lenders compete, effective rents rise and buyers accept less income yield. Favorable leasing in a specific submarket must translate into durable NOI.
Watch: repeatable comparable-sale caps, tighter debt quotes, fewer concessions and rising collected rent after expenses.
What would weaken it: falling policy rates without lower property borrowing costs, or asking-rent gains offset by concessions and insurance.
Stable-cap case
Operating recovery and financing costs roughly offset. Value grows mainly through income, while newer, stabilized buildings and older assets continue to trade differently.
Watch: stable cap rates within a comparable property group and positive NOI growth without a change in underwriting conventions.
What would weaken it: a persistent change in lender proceeds, distress sales or a local lease-up wave that breaks the income forecast.
Expansion case
Higher borrowing costs, weaker collections, capital-work surprises or refinancing pressure raise the return buyers require. A property can face higher exit caps even in an improving metro.
Watch: lower lender loan amounts, wider sale caps, longer marketing periods and expenses rising faster than collected income.
What would weaken it: deeper buyer competition and completed sales at lower caps on genuinely comparable NOI.
No basis-point forecast is assigned to these scenarios. For a purchase decision, test a stable cap and at least one wider-cap case; use compression as a sensitivity that must be justified, not the assumption that rescues an otherwise weak deal.
Why a Federal Reserve cut is not a cap-rate formula
Cap rates reflect expected income growth, risk, liquidity and the alternatives available to buyers. A lower short-term policy rate does not guarantee a lower long-term mortgage quote or stronger rents. Likewise, subtracting a Treasury yield from a cap rate produces a spread, not a complete measure of risk: a building has operating expenses, capital needs and uncertain resale value.
How compression and expansion change property value
At constant NOI, lower cap rates raise value and higher cap rates reduce it. The percentage effect is nonlinear: a move from 5% to 6% is a 100-bp expansion, but value falls 16.7%, not 1%.
- Normalize incomeAnnual collected revenue less buyer operating expenses = NOI.
- Match the rateComparable property, geography, income period and expense convention.
- Calculate valueNOI ÷ cap rate as a decimal. Then deduct transaction costs and debt for equity proceeds.
Hypothetical assumptions. NOI change is cumulative over your chosen holding period, not an annual growth rate. Results exclude debt, sale costs, taxes and interim cash flow.
Starting value $2,000,000
Exit value $1,833,333 (-8.3%)
$100,000 starting NOI at 5% → $110,000 exit NOI at 6%. NOI must change by 20.0% to preserve starting value at this exit cap rate.
NOI growth does not always offset a wider exit cap
Starting with $100,000 NOI and a 5% cap, indicated value is $2,000,000. A 10% total NOI increase produces $110,000, but at a 6% exit cap the property is worth $1,833,333. It takes 20% total NOI growth to preserve the original value at that cap, before sale costs.
| Total NOI change | 4.5% exit | 5.0% exit | 5.5% exit | 6.0% exit | 6.5% exit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -10% | 0.0% | -10.0% | -18.2% | -25.0% | -30.8% |
| 0% | +11.1% | 0.0% | -9.1% | -16.7% | -23.1% |
| +10% | +22.2% | +10.0% | 0.0% | -8.3% | -15.4% |
| +20% | +33.3% | +20.0% | +9.1% | 0.0% | -7.7% |
Target-price check: at $100,000 sustainable NOI, a required 5.5% cap supports $1,818,182 before closing costs and immediate capital work. A higher purchase price must be supported by additional credible income or a consciously lower required yield.
Rebuild the seller’s cap rate with buyer expenses
A sale brochure may capitalize trailing income, a forward budget or a stabilized projection. Match the income convention before comparing rates. Freddie Mac’s appraisal guidance explains why inconsistent income and reserve treatment can distort the comparison.
| Operating item | Amount |
|---|---|
| Scheduled rent | $240,000 |
| Vacancy and collection loss (5%) | -$12,000 |
| Effective rental income | $228,000 |
| Buyer property taxes (assumption) | -$24,000 |
| Insurance (assumption; replace with quote) | -$12,000 |
| Management | -$18,000 |
| Repairs and routine turnover | -$24,000 |
| Owner-paid utilities | -$22,000 |
| Payroll, contracts, administration and other recurring costs | -$28,000 |
| Net operating income | $100,000 |
Operating expenses total $128,000. At a $2,000,000 price, NOI ÷ price = 5.00%. Replacement reserves and capital improvements are outside this example’s NOI and shown separately below; some lenders deduct reserves in underwritten NOI. Reconcile their convention before comparing cap rates or DSCR.
California adjustments that can change the bid
- Property tax after purchase. A change in ownership generally triggers reassessment unless an exclusion applies. Confirm the transaction, assessed value, local charges and supplemental timing with the assessor. The assumed $24,000 above is not a universal California tax rate. BOE guidance.
- Rent regulation and the in-place roll. For covered housing, the statewide annual ceiling is the lower of 10% or 5% plus the applicable cost-of-living change. Exemptions and stricter local rules matter. Model the actual tenancy, coverage and permitted timing; a market-rent estimate is not permission to raise an occupied unit to that rent. California DOJ guidance.
- Insurance scope. Obtain a bindable quote for the building and use, checking deductible, liability, loss-of-rents and excluded perils. If FAIR Plan coverage is involved, review complementary coverage with the broker instead of treating the fire premium as the complete insurance budget. California Department of Insurance.
- Capital work and maintenance. Obtain condition reports and bids for roofs, mechanical systems, balconies and any required seismic work. Separate routine repairs, annual reserves and one-time rehabilitation. A seller’s low repair year does not establish a sustainable expense run rate.
An expense error is also a valuation error. If verified annual expenses are $12,000 higher than the budget, NOI falls to $88,000. At a 5% cap, indicated value falls by $240,000. The correction comes from cash flow; it does not require a market-wide cap-rate change.
A 5% cap is not a 5% cash-on-cash return
Keep the same $2,000,000 property and $100,000 NOI. Assume a $1,200,000 loan, 6.5% interest, monthly payments and 30-year amortization. This is an illustration, not a lender quote.
| Measure | Calculation / result |
|---|---|
| Annual debt service | $91,018 |
| Annual replacement reserve | $10,000 |
| Cash flow after reserve | -$1,018 |
| Cash invested | $800,000 down + $60,000 closing + $40,000 initial work = $900,000 |
| Cash-on-cash return | -0.11%, before income taxes |
| DSCR before reserve | 1.10× |
| Debt yield | 8.33% |
The annual mortgage constant is 7.58%, above the 5% property cap. Amortization makes debt service larger than interest alone. If a lender requires 1.25× DSCR on this NOI, it permits at most $80,000 annual debt service, or about $1,054,739 of this illustrative loan. Actual lender sizing can also be constrained by loan-to-value, debt yield and reserve treatment.
Yield on cost: if completed work eventually supports $120,000 stabilized NOI on $2,100,000 total acquisition, closing and work cost, yield on cost is 5.71%. That projected return is different from the 5% going-in cap. Budget lease-up time, carrying costs and execution risk before relying on it.
Free core analysis is available without an account. Enter the actual rent roll, expenses and loan terms in the analyzer; these report assumptions are not automatically transferred. The worksheet keeps the expense and financing checks together.
Questions to resolve before relying on a California cap rate
What is a good cap rate in California?
One that compensates for the property’s risks and meets the buyer’s return requirements using credible NOI. A higher rate may reflect weaker income, expensive capital work or a thinner resale market. Compare the same property type and income basis, then test debt coverage and exit sensitivity. The lowest or highest regional rate is not an investment recommendation.
Are these rates appropriate for a single-family rental or duplex?
Not automatically. These research benchmarks focus on multifamily apartments; K2’s sample has explicit size and price filters. Smaller rentals can compete with owner-occupants and have different expenses and resale pricing. Calculate the home’s NOI and use matching local sales. The California market-selection screen is a starting point for location research.
Can a high going-in cap hide a weak exit?
Yes. Temporary income, an underestimated repair budget or a shrinking tenant base can raise the apparent entry yield. At exit, buyers may use lower sustainable NOI and a wider cap. Stress those two changes together, not one at a time. Check a voucher-backed building’s income assumptions separately when assistance payments are part of the rent roll.
Do these figures apply to office, retail and industrial buildings?
No. Tenant credit, lease length, reimbursements, vacancy downtime and leasing capital change the valuation. K2 publishes separate commercial-sector comparisons; its mixed commercial city medians should not be relabeled apartment cap rates. This report deliberately focuses on rental housing.
How often will the page change?
This is a dated research edition, not a live pricing feed. The next review should follow new quarterly reports, a material source correction or a significant change in financing or operating rules. Dates and charts advance only after the evidence is checked. Report a correction with the source and observation date.
Sources, definitions and research limits
Research checked October 18, 2026. Publication dates are given when the source states them; reporting periods are never substituted for publication dates. RentalCalcs transcribed the displayed observations, calculated basis-point changes and built the scenarios. It did not inspect the underlying licensed sale files or appraise any pictured property.
Comparison rules: no blended statewide cap; no interpolation of missing neighborhoods; no office-to-apartment substitution; no gross-rent index presented as NOI yield. The charts retain each publisher’s geography and measure. Sale-mix changes, undisclosed NOI conventions and small reported samples limit the conclusions.
What is original here: the cross-region comparison, conditional underwriting interpretation, reproducible value matrix, buyer-expense example and free worksheet. Market observations remain attributed to their publishers. The outlook separates source forecasts from editorial judgments and names evidence that would change those judgments.
Source ledger: periods, data providers and refresh triggers
- Kidder Mathews: Bay Area multifamily, Q3 2026
Period: Q3 2026, with Q2 2026 and Q3 2025 comparisons.
Underlying source: CoStar. Use and limits: Published average cap rate and operating indicators. Sample sizes, weighting and comparable NOI definitions are not disclosed in the public summary.
Refresh when: Next quarterly report or a publisher correction. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Kidder Mathews: Los Angeles multifamily, Q3 2026
Period: Q3 2026, with Q2 2026 and Q3 2025 comparisons.
Underlying source: CoStar. Use and limits: Published average cap rate and operating indicators. Sample sizes, weighting and comparable NOI definitions are not disclosed in the public summary.
Refresh when: Next quarterly report or a publisher correction. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Kidder Mathews: Orange County multifamily, Q3 2026
Period: Q3 2026, with Q2 2026 and Q3 2025 comparisons.
Underlying source: CoStar. Use and limits: Published average cap rate and operating indicators. Sample sizes, weighting and comparable NOI definitions are not disclosed in the public summary.
Refresh when: Next quarterly report or a publisher correction. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Kidder Mathews: San Diego multifamily, Q3 2026
Period: Q3 2026, with Q2 2026 and Q3 2025 comparisons.
Underlying source: CoStar. Use and limits: Published average cap rate and operating indicators. Sample sizes, weighting and comparable NOI definitions are not disclosed in the public summary.
Refresh when: Next quarterly report or a publisher correction. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Kidder Mathews: Inland Empire multifamily, Q3 2026
Period: Q3 2026, with Q2 2026 and Q3 2025 comparisons.
Underlying source: CoStar. Use and limits: Published average cap rate and operating indicators. Sample sizes, weighting and comparable NOI definitions are not disclosed in the public summary.
Refresh when: Next quarterly report or a publisher correction. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Kidder Mathews: Sacramento multifamily, Q3 2026
Period: Q3 2026, with Q2 2026 and Q3 2025 comparisons.
Underlying source: CoStar. Use and limits: Published average cap rate and operating indicators. Sample sizes, weighting and comparable NOI definitions are not disclosed in the public summary.
Refresh when: Next quarterly report or a publisher correction. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- K2 Investments: Southern California cap rates, Q3 2026
Period: Closed sales: October 2024–September 2025 versus October 2025–September 2026; exports October 2 and 15, 2026.
Underlying source: CoStar sales comparables; K2 calculations. Use and limits: Median reported cap rates, apartment sales ≥$1 million and ≥5,000 square feet. Selected clusters qualify with ≥10 sales and ≥8 reported caps in each year. Property mix changes; individual NOI not audited.
Refresh when: Updated sale sample, methodology or revised exports. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Lee & Associates: Fresno multifamily, Q2 2026
Period: Q2 2026; publication day not stated.
Underlying source: Publisher lists CoStar and other third-party/proprietary sources. Use and limits: Market indicators on PDF page 1; cap-rate sample and NOI convention not disclosed. Older than the Q3 regional table.
Refresh when: Q3 local report or revision. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Lee & Associates: Bakersfield multifamily, Q2 2026
Period: Q2 2026; publication day not stated.
Underlying source: Publisher lists CoStar and other third-party/proprietary sources. Use and limits: Market indicators on PDF page 1; cap-rate sample and NOI convention not disclosed. Older than the Q3 regional table.
Refresh when: Q3 local report or revision. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Lee & Associates: From supply shock to supply cliff
Period: Q2 2026 research with August lease-up context; publication day not stated.
Underlying source: Lee research; cited Yardi Matrix and NAHB research. Use and limits: National supply and leasing interpretation, not a California-specific cap-rate forecast.
Refresh when: Next supply report or a material delivery/concession change. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- CBRE: U.S. Cap Rate Survey, H1 2026
Period: H1 2026; survey conducted June 2026; published August 12, 2026.
Underlying source: CBRE real estate professionals. Use and limits: Professional estimates informed by deals, not a California transaction average. National direction only.
Refresh when: H2 survey; material financing or liquidity change. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- CBRE: 2026 midyear outlook: capital markets
Period: 2026 midyear outlook, looking into 2027.
Underlying source: CBRE research forecast. Use and limits: National forecast. Does not establish a future cap rate for a California property.
Refresh when: Next outlook or material change in benchmark rates. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- CBRE: A more guarded outlook for cap rates
Period: Published August 26, 2026.
Underlying source: CBRE survey interpretation. Use and limits: Respondent expectations, not realized price movements. Related to the same CBRE survey, not an independent dataset.
Refresh when: Next survey. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- California Board of Equalization: Change in ownership: reassessment
Period: Guidance accessed October 18, 2026.
Underlying source: California BOE. Use and limits: General change-in-ownership rules and exclusions; obtain an assessor estimate for the actual acquisition.
Refresh when: Law, assessor guidance or transaction changes. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- California Department of Justice: Tenant Protection Act: landlords and property managers
Period: Guidance accessed October 18, 2026.
Underlying source: California Attorney General. Use and limits: Statewide rules and exemptions; local ordinances may be more restrictive. No address-specific legal conclusion.
Refresh when: Statute, local ordinance or annual rent-limit change. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- California Department of Insurance: California FAIR Plan
Period: Guidance accessed October 18, 2026.
Underlying source: California Department of Insurance. Use and limits: Coverage guidance, not a property premium quote or a cap-rate estimate.
Refresh when: Renewal, carrier quote or coverage change. Accessed October 18, 2026.
- Freddie Mac Multifamily: Appraisal guidance: capitalization rates
Period: 2022 methodological guidance.
Underlying source: Freddie Mac. Use and limits: Consistency of comparable income and cap-rate assumptions. Not a current market-rate source.
Refresh when: Revised appraisal guidance. Accessed October 18, 2026.
Educational research for evaluating assumptions; a property valuation requires its own evidence. Brokerage sources can have different commercial interests and methodologies. No source count is presented as independent corroboration when the data provider is shared.
California county market directory · San Francisco cap-rate methodology · Corrections
