The recent September market reports analyzing the sales of Pasadena homes along with the sales of homes in the South Pasadena real estate market described two very different scenarios. How could two cities so close together have such very different results? To recheck my results I went back and reviewed the data only this time I used the same search parameters. The results were both predictable and surprising.

Previously the analysis was completed two different ways. For Pasadena, I looked at the current month and compared it to the same month last year. This is the manner in which the data appears in all of the monthly housing reports you see in the media including newspaper and television. South Pasadena was reported differently. Due to the small number of homes in this market, comparing months in a year versus year analysis can have a wide variance. Therefore the results were compared looking at 9 months from January – September (2007 vs 2008).

What we see is when the market was increasing, the gap in home values was fairly consistent and predictable. The appreciation rates in both markets appeared to be linear. However, when the market began its decline the story was much different. The decline in South Pasadena has been much more of a flat line with very little growth or decline from 2006 to 2008. Pasadena on the other hand has shown to be much more volatile than its neighbor to the south. Especially just within the last year.

According to the 2000 census, Pasadena has roughly 54,132 housing units and almost a 46% ownership rate. South Pasadena on the other hand has about 11,000 units with 45% ownership as of 2002. The Pasadena housing market is approximately 5 times the size of South Pasadena, however rental rates and home ownership are basically the same. So why does Pasadena with its many more options and opportunities for home ownership become more susceptible to market declines?

The source for the date is the i-Tech MLS. The data was not verified for its accuracy or duplicity.