What do you expect from the NAR?!?!? They will do ANYTHING to sell homes and put that precious commission in their pockets; including "upping" the numbers to make the environment appear better than it is. People (Buyers and Sellers!!) have to learn this: Realtors make a commission, so your needs may be outweighed by the need to pay their bills!!! They are no different than car salespeople.

The National Association of Realtors is re-examining its numbers...

Haha, that's a good one.

Although some elementary math might need re-examining, when this association comes up with numbers, I instinctively divide everything by 2.

So far they have replaced their "economist" for (too obviously) specious projection and bloviating...
now they get to replace their accountants too.

Hi Jamie - I always check in with your blog for the latest on Baltimore housing! Great information for your readers.

I am an independent appraiser/market analyst brought in by MRIS/RBI to provide additional analysis and commentary on the Baltimore housing market.

Here's what I wrote about the NAR controversy last week in my own blog. I think the NAR controversy is more about the multiplier tying the 2000 Census' American home survey to MLS sales totals and the fact that a decade went by without any modification of the adjustment despite the changing landscape. CoreLogic compared against the NAR extrapolated numbers and noticed a widening gap between their results and NAR's. I think your effort here is to do a reality check between public record results against the MLS results.

I'm just curious - in your Baltimore Metro to Baltimore Metro comparison, RBI includes Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Anne Arundel County, Carroll County, Harford County, and Howard County. Does the data you are comparing include the same geographic boundaries?

I find it fascinating, especially in the current market, how much the real estate conversation revolves around national/regional home price indices that lag the market by as much as 6 months. I'm guessing that most consumers don't realize it.

With the systems upgrade, which was brief but painful, RBI provides more market transparency with even more robust analytics. Look for a lot more reporting on market conditions from moi, especially pending home sales.

Hi, Jonathan -- thanks for popping in. I am indeed using the same definition of the Baltimore metro area to compare the MRIS/RBI numbers with the public records (the federal definition of the metro area includes Queen Anne's County, but locally, it's usually left out).

Do you have any thoughts about why the two MLS systems in Maryland would be showing more sales in 2010 for the state as a whole than were recorded? Inevitably some sales are settled in late November or December but aren't recorded until January, so the timelines aren't identical. However, that happens every year. Is there something else I'm missing?

Ok good to know about Baltimore. As far as comparing Maryland statewide and 2 different systems, I am not sure - I am always leery about arm's length classifications in public record - from well-earned experience as an appraiser. ;-) However I'll look into it and get back.

Ah, have you seen a trend of arms-length sales classified as not arms-length? (Short sales and REO sales, perhaps?)

Here are a few thoughts on the earlier points you brought up relating to Baltimore stats. RBI hasn't posted it's year end 2010 data so I am not clear what is being aggregated. I think you'll see more consistency once the data goes live (soon). The Baltimore area state data captures owner occupied and does not include auctions, foreclosures, etc. MD uses fiscal year for their stats July 1 - June 30 so perhaps that is why the statewide data doesn't match up.

I haven't specifically observed that trend but it is logical. If the state omits REOs and short sales as arm's length (I am not specifically sure about that - off the top of my head) and we clearly see a general increase in distressed sales activity, then yes, the data will not match up.

Incidentally, I've linked out to you from Matrix for a while now.

Are you sure those MRIS numbers are accurate? Sometimes they take longer for the realtors to really report what is happening.

Jonathan, the state recordation figures I used are calendar year. I have the underlying data, so I can see that the dates run January-December. For the MRIS/RBI numbers, I tallied the initially reported monthly figures for a full-year number. That's not going to account for any changes that happened after the initial snapshots -- sales entered late, for instance -- but they are the figures that people look at from month to month.

I know that there are short sales and foreclosure resales being entered into the state's system as arms-length transactions, because I've seen plenty of examples in past data. What's more difficult to tell is whether most/all short sales and foreclosure resales are getting coded that way, or whether a significant number are knocked into the "not arms-length" category. No dataset is perfect, that's for sure.

Interesting commentary on the numbers fight, by the way: http://matrix.millersamuel.com/?p=10476

Ok good to know on the Baltimore data.

If I understand your methodology, annualizing the monthly creates a high probability of skewing the annualized from actual, high or low because of seasonality. Maybe that's the reason for the statewide disparity.

Aren't you on vacation BTW? If so, you are definitely a wonk. ;-)

Yeah, vacation isn't what it used to be. :-D

I didn't annualize one monthly figure (i.e. December times 12), but rather added up January through December. That's never exactly the same as the year-end total MRIS/RBI releases in February or March, but it's usually pretty close, if memory serves.

MRIS numbers come from data where one can associate a property to each transaction and they used to be aggregated on the same day of the following month every month. RBI seems to still be working this out. Transfer recordation does lag MRIS reporting and this lag seems to vary by jurisdiction, not metro area. Also, there are areas on the Eastern Shore where properties are sometimes listed with two multiple listing services and may then be reported as sold by both those services. This is not a big number but would make it difficult to reconcile SDAT and multiple listing service data.

Note that December 2010 was the best December for Baltimore Metro closings since 2007, and thus, a lag in SDAT reflecting this data until January will make it impossible to reconcile the data. If the market was consistently seasonal, the same percentage of annual sales in each month each year, we could establish the lag in recodation data and reconcile. However, the month of the year is only one of the factors contributing to this roller coaster ride the real estate market has been on. There have been tax credits. There have been interest rate and underwriting changes. There have been swings in consumer confidence.

I believe it less important that one can reconcile all the different data banks and more important that you look at the changes in each given one. This is what we do with all the indices.

Do not lose sight of the fact that for most of us a home is a place to live first and I expect that where we live may just cost money, not be an ATM.

Hi, Ross, I'm glad you weighed in -- you would have been one of my calls had I been in the office this week. Good point about December 2010, and I didn't realize that there was MLS overlap on the Eastern Shore -- that's interesting.