CoreLogic Pain and Gain December Quarter, 2016

Pain and Gain December Quarter, 2016 A quarterly assessment of realised gross profit and loss based on dwelling re-sales over the December Quarter of 2016

Contents Headline results for September quarter 2016

3

National overview

4

Houses vs units

6

Focus on major capital city houses and units

7

Investor vs owner occupier resales

9

Hold periods

10

Focus on regional markets

11

Loss-making resales across the regions

13

Pain & Gain: Sydney council regions

14

Pain & Gain: Melbourne council regions

15

Pain & Gain: South-East Queensland council regions

16

Pain & Gain: Adelaide council regions

17

Pain & Gain: Perth council regions

18

Pain & Gain: Hobart council regions

19

Pain & Gain: Darwin council regions

19

Pain & Gain: Canberra council regions

20

About CoreLogic

21

Disclaimers

22

Executive Summary CoreLogic’s Pain and Gain Report is a quarterly analysis of residential properties which were resold over the quarter. It compares the most recent sale price to the previous sale price in order to determine whether the property sold at a gross profit or gross loss. It provides a proxy for the performance of each housing market and highlights the magnitude of profit or loss the typical seller of a home makes across those regions analysed.

Nationally, 8.9% of the dwellings resold over the final quarter of 2016 transacted for less than their previous purchase price. The 8.9% of dwellings resold at a loss was moderately lower than the 9.3% over the September 2016 quarter, however compared with the same quarter a year ago, the proportion of loss making sales has increased from 8.2% of all resales at a loss. The proportion of loss making resales reached a recent low point over the three months to November 2016 when 7.9% of all resales were loss making. Since this time the proportion of loss making sales has been gradually drifting higher. The total gross loss realised over the quarter was recorded at $467 million with a median gross loss of $33,000 per sale.

More than 9 out of every 10 homes resold for more than their previous purchase price over the December 2016 quarter. Based on these resales there was $18.8 billion in realised profit over the quarter and the median profit across these resales was $172,000.

The data also highlights the fact that ownership of property, whether for investment or owner occupier purposes, should be seen as a long-term investment. Across the country, those homes that resold at a loss had a typical length of ownership of 6.3 years and across all sales recording a gross profit the typical length of ownership was recorded at 8.7 years.

The capital city housing markets continue to record a lower proportion of loss-making resales than regional areas of the country. The trends in regional areas show that the instances of homes reselling at a loss are continuing to trend lower in the coastal and lifestyle markets while losses remain very high in most of the regions linked to the resources sector.

3

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

National Overview

Of all the residential properties resold over the December 2016 quarter, 8.9% of these transacted for less than their previous purchase price. The proportion of total resales that were at a loss has trended lower over the quarter, down from 9.3% at the end of the September 2016 quarter but up from 8.2% a year ago.

While the proportion of loss-making resales has increased over the past year, most vendors are selling their homes for more than the price it was purchased for however, there are some substantial differences across the regions of the country.

The combined capital city housing markets have recorded a lower proportion of resales at a loss compared to regional areas. Over the three months to December 2016, 6.8% of capital city dwellings and 12.6% of regional dwellings resold for less than their previous purchase price. The proportion of dwellings reselling at a loss has nudged slightly lower across both metropolitan and regional areas over the most recent quarter. The trend towards a lower proportion of resales at a loss across each region points to an overall increase in dwelling value growth nationally.

The below chart shows how over recent ears the proportion of loss-making resales has trended lower.

The chart also shows that regional areas of the country have been seeing a much higher proportion of loss-making resales over recent years reflecting a divergence which has occurred between capital city and regional housing market conditions over the period.

Proportion of loss making sales, combined capitals v regional markets 30%

Combined Capitals

Combined Regional

25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 1998 Dec 2001 Dec 2004 Dec 2007 Dec 2010 Dec 2013 Dec 2016

When vendors sell after a shorter period of ownership they are inherently more likely to sell at a loss than if they hold their properties longer. Nationally, homes resold at a loss over the quarter had a median length of ownership of 6.2 years for houses and 6.6 years for units while homes sold at a loss had typically been owned by the vendor for 9.2 years for houses and 7.7 years for units.

Over the December 2016 quarter there was $467.0 million in realised losses form resales compared to $18.8 billion in realised profits. The median loss was recorded at $33,000 while the median profit was significantly higher at $172,000.

The broad trends nationally show that most capital cities and coastal markets linked to the tourism and lifestyle sectors are seeing the proportion of loss-making resales fall. On the other hand, regions linked to the resources sector have generally continued to experience heightened proportion of homes reselling at a loss.

4

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

National Overview

Historically, houses have show a lower proportion of loss-making resales than units and this continues to be the case currently. This is due to the fact that the value of a house is derived largely from its land value which is dependant on its location, a unit’s value is much less linked to its land value. Over the December 2016 quarter, 7.6% of houses and 12.3% of units resold at a loss across the country.

Across the combined capital cities, 5.4% of houses resold for less than their previous purchase price over the December 2016 quarter compared to 10.0% of units. Houses and units have recorded an increased proportion of resales at a loss compared to a year ago.

Over the December 2016 quarter there was $243.0 million in realised losses from resales of capital city residential properties split between $153.2 million for houses and $89.8 million for units. On the other hand, capital city property resales resulted in $15.3 billion in profits over the quarter split between $12.1 billion for houses and $3.2 billion for units.

Outside of the capital cities, 11.1% of house resales and 17.8% of units resales were at a price below the previous purchase price over the December 2016 quarter. The proportion of regional unit sales at a loss is lower over both the quarter and year while house resales are lower over the quarter but slightly higher over the past 12 months.

The 11.1% of regional house resales at a loss over the December 2016 quarter resulted in $153.5 million in realised losses however, there were also $2.9 billion in realised profits from house resales. For units, there were $70.5 million in realised losses over the quarter compared to $548.6 million in realised profits.

Proportion of loss making resales, combined capital cities, houses v units 20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Dec 1998

5

Houses

Dec 2001

Dec 2004

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Units

Dec 2016

National Overview

Across the individual capital cities, the proportion of homes reselling at a loss fell over the quarter in each capital city except for Adelaide and Perth. While the proportion of loss-making resales was lower over the quarter in most capital cities, it was higher over the year in Melbourne, Brisbane Perth and Darwin and unchanged in Sydney.

Proportion of total resales at a loss over time: Sydney vs. Melbourne vs. Brisbane vs. Adelaide 30%

Sydney

Melbourne

Brisbane

Adelaide

25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Across the individual capital cities, the proportion of loss-making resales over the December 2016 quarter were recorded at: 1.9% in Sydney, 4.4% in Melbourne, 7.9% in Brisbane, 8.0% in Adelaide, 21.2% in Perth, 8.4% in Hobart, 28.0% in Darwin and 8.6% in Canberra. Comparing these figures to those a year earlier provides insight into the strong and improving housing markets and those which have weakened.

Over the December 2015 quarter, the proportion of loss-making resales across the individual capital cities were recorded at: 1.9% in Sydney, 4.0% in Melbourne, 7.4% in Brisbane, 8.1% in Adelaide, 12.9% in Perth, 8.6% in Hobart, 12.6% in Darwin and 8.7% in Canberra. In most cities the proportion of lossmaking resales is relatively similar to what it was a year ago however, the data highlights the dramatic deterioration is selling conditions in Perth and Darwin over the past year.

Proportion of total resales at a loss over time: Perth vs. Hobart vs. Darwin vs. Canberra 40%

Perth

35%

Hobart

Darwin

Canberra

30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

6

Dec 2007

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Major capital cities houses vs. units

Looking at the four largest capital cities across the country, the data shows that in three of the four there is a significant disparity between losses being occurred on resales of houses compared to those for units. In Melbourne and Brisbane, the proportion of unit stock resold at a loss was more than five times that of houses and in Perth units were almost twice as likely to have resold at a loss than houses.

Resales of houses & units - Sydney 25%

Houses

20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

Resales of houses & units - Melbourne 25%

Houses

Units

15%

15%

10%

10%

5%

5%

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2010

25% 20%

Dec 2007

Dec 2007

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Resales of houses & units - Brisbane

20%

0% Dec 2004

Units

Dec 2016

Sydney is the only major capital city bucking the trend of a much higher proportion of loss-making resales on units. In fact, the proportion of units resold at a loss over the quarter was slightly lower than houses.

Houses

0% Dec 2004

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Units

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Resales of houses & units - Perth 40%

Houses

35%

Units

30%

Across these major capital cities. The proportion of houses reselling at a loss over the December 2016 quarter was recorded at 1.9% in Sydney, 1.8% in Melbourne, 4.1% in Brisbane and 18.9% in Perth.

By comparison, the proportion of units resold at a loss over the quarter was recorded at 1.8% in Sydney, 10.2% in Melbourne, 21.0% in Brisbane and 33.8% in Perth.

7

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Houses vs units

Across the country, 7.6% of houses and 12.3% of units resold over the December 2016 quarter transacted for less than their previous purchase price. In the capital cities, the proportion of houses resold at a loss over the quarter (5.4%) was almost half that of units (10.0%) while across the regional markets, the proportion of house resales at a loss (7.6%) was much lower than the 17.8% of units resold at a loss.

Sydney remains the only region analysed in which the proportion of units resold at a loss over the quarter was actually lower than houses. On the other hand, in Melbourne, Brisbane and the ACT the proportion of units resold at a loss over the quarter was more than five times greater than houses resold at a loss.

The historical data indicates that it has been extremely rare for resales of houses to record a higher proportion of loss than units. This is reflective of the fact that house values have typically increased at a more rapid pace than units. It is also reflective of the fact that historically houses have recorded high buyer demand against a backdrop of constrained supply. In a market like Sydney where more units have been built than houses over the past two decades and the gap between house and unit prices is substantial, the trends have changed recently with units proving less likely to resell at a loss than houses.

This is probably also linked to the fact that there is a wide gap between house and unit prices in the city and for many units are now the only option for home purchase.

Proportion of total resales at a loss/gain, houses vs. units, Dec 2016 quarter Houses Region Sydney Regional NSW Melbourne Regional Vic Brisbane Regional Qld Adelaide Regional SA Perth Regional WA Hobart Regional Tas Darwin Regional NT Australian Capital Territory National Cap city Regional

8

Units

Pain

Gain

Pain

Gain

1.9% 4.6% 1.8% 6.5% 4.1% 17.1% 7.1% 22.4% 18.9% 30.3% 8.2% 16.1% 22.6% 27.7% 1.1% 7.6% 5.4% 11.1%

98.1% 95.4% 98.2% 93.5% 95.9% 82.9% 92.9% 77.6% 81.1% 69.7% 91.8% 83.9% 77.4% 72.3% 98.9% 92.9% 94.6% 88.9%

1.8% 8.6% 10.2% 9.6% 21.0% 22.4% 10.5% 23.5% 33.8% 53.7% 9.0% 26.6% 42.3% 28.6% 23.2% 12.3% 10.0% 17.8%

98.2% 91.4% 89.8% 90.4% 79.0% 77.6% 89.5% 76.5% 66.2% 46.3% 91.0% 73.4% 57.7% 71.4% 76.8% 87.7% 90.0% 82.2%

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Investor vs Owner Occupier Resales

Investors and owner occupiers will at times act very differently when dealing with their residential property assets. Over the December 2016 quarter, 7.3% of owner occupiers resold their homes at a loss compared to 12.0% of investors. Across all major regions of the country investors were more likely to resell their properties at a loss than owner occupiers.

Across the combined capital cities, 5.5% of owner occupiers resold their dwellings at a loss over the quarter compared to 9.0% of investors. In Melbourne, Brisbane and the Australian Capital Territory, investors were twice as likely to resell properties at a loss than owner occupiers were.

Regional markets saw 10.4% of owner occupiers and 17.8% of investors resell their properties at a loss over the quarter.

It is more beneficial for an owner occupier or an investor to resell their property at a profit. In a falling market owner occupiers may be more prepared to sell at a loss if they are purchasing their next home at an equivalent or greater discount. Meanwhile, investors, because of taxation rules, would seemingly be more prepared to incur a loss because they (unlike owner occupiers) can offset those loses against future capital gains. This feature of taxation may potentially create risks in the future, particularly considering the heightened level of investment buying activity over recent years. If home values fall in the future, investors (which have been increasingly active in the housing market) may be more inclined to sell at a loss and offset those losses which in turn could result in much more supply becoming available for purchase at a time in which demand for housing falls because values are declining.

Proportion of total resales at a loss/gain, owner occupied vs. investors, Dec 2016 quarter

Region Sydney Regional NSW Melbourne Regional Vic Brisbane Regional Qld Adelaide Regional SA Perth Regional WA Hobart Regional Tas Darwin Regional NT Australian Capital Territory National Cap city Regional 9

PAIN Owner Occupied 1.8% 4.7% 2.2% 5.4% 5.1% 19.7% 6.3% 19.7% 19.8% 26.8% 7.5% 14.5% 25.8% 25.4% 4.3% 7.3% 5.5% 10.4%

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Investor 1.9% 7.2% 7.6% 10.3% 12.8% 31.6% 11.0% 31.6% 26.1% 44.9% 10.3% 25.0% 29.3% 30.3% 18.1% 12.0% 9.0% 17.8%

GAIN Owner Investor Occupied 98.2% 98.1% 95.3% 92.8% 97.8% 92.4% 94.6% 89.7% 94.9% 87.2% 84.7% 74.6% 93.7% 89.0% 80.3% 68.4% 80.2% 73.9% 73.2% 55.1% 92.5% 89.7% 85.5% 75.0% 74.2% 70.7% 74.6% 69.7% 95.7% 81.9% 92.7% 88.0% 94.5% 91.0% 89.6% 82.2%

Hold Periods

Those houses that resold at a loss over the December 2016 quarter had typically been owned by the vendors for 6.2 years while units had been held for 6.6 years. On the other hand, houses resold at a profit had typically been held for 9.2 years compared to 7.7 years for units.

At a capital city level, houses resold at a loss over the quarter had been typically held for 5.4 years while units had been held for 5.9 years. For those dwellings resold at a profit the typical length of ownership was recorded at 9.2 years for houses and 7.7 years for units. In Brisbane, Hobart and the Australian Capital Territory houses selling at a loss typically had a longer hold period than units, in all other capital cities units had longer hold periods for loss-making resales than houses. The recent strength in value growth in Sydney and Melbourne is evident with homes reselling at a loss typically having lower hold periods and homes reselling at a profit also typically having shorter hold periods.

In non-capital city regions of Australia, houses resold at a loss were typically held for 6.7 years while units had been held for 8.2 years. For units, loss-making resales had typically been held for 9.1 years compared to 8.0 years for units. The weakness in many of the regional areas of the country becomes clear from the table which highlights that the typical length of ownership for homes resold at a profit is typically much longer in regional areas of the states and territories relative to the capital city markets.

Median hold period of resales at a loss/gain, houses vs. units, Dec 2016 quarter Region Sydney Regional NSW Melbourne Regional Vic Brisbane Regional Qld Adelaide Regional SA Perth Regional WA Hobart Regional Tas Darwin Regional NT Australian Capital Territory National Cap city Regional

10

PAIN Houses 3.6 6.1 3.7 5.8 7.0 6.9 5.9 7.5 4.9 7.6 6.7 6.5 4.7 4.5 6.6 6.2 5.4 6.7

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

GAIN Units

Houses

Units

4.7 8.2 5.6 6.9 6.5 8.6 6.2 7.9 5.6 7.4 6.3 6.8 5.9 5.3 5.9 6.6 5.9 8.2

9.4 8.8 9.1 8.7 9.0 9.5 8.8 9.4 10.5 11.4 8.5 9.2 10.5 9.0 9.6 9.2 9.2 9.1

6.7 7.3 8.0 8.6 9.3 8.6 8.5 8.5 11.6 12.5 7.2 9.2 10.2 9.6 9.0 7.7 7.6 8.0

Focus on Regional Markets

Major mining regions Although commodity prices have rallied recently, regions of the country linked to the resources sector continue to be plagued by many homes selling for less than their previous purchase price. Across the major regions analysed, the proportion of loss-making resales over the December 2016 quarter was recorded at: 44.3% in Fitzroy, 8.2% in Hunter Valley (excluding Newcastle), 58.4% in Mackay, 30.3% in Outback SA, 42.6% in Townsville and 50.1% in Outback WA. Although the proportion of resales at a loss remains high in most regions, the figure has actually reduced over the quarter ion all regions except for Outback WA. Although commodity prices have rallied over the past year it has not translated into any significant improvement in resources related investment. Many of these regions continue to experience soft labour markets, low housing demand and high levels of housing stock available for sale. It is also apparent that plenty of home owners are willing to sell however, there remains a lack of willing buyers. Those that are successfully selling their properties are in many instances (a majority in some areas) doing so at a substantial discount from the price at which they originally purchased the homes. Until such time as resources investment lifts or these areas can find ways to diversify their economies we would expect ongoing weakness and heightened instances of home owners selling for less than the original purchase price. It is encouraging to see a slightly lower proportion of resales at a loss over the past quarter however, instances of loss remain higher ion these regions than they are across the rest of the country.

Proportion of total resales at a loss over time: major resource regions 70% 60% 50% 40%

Fitzroy Hunter Valley (ex, Newcastle) Mackay Outback SA Townsville Outback WA

30% 20% 10% 0% Dec 1996

11

Dec 2000

Dec 2004

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Dec 2008

Dec 2012

Dec 2016

Focus on Regional Markets

Major coastal regions While towns linked to the resources sector are seeing heightened volumes of homes reselling at a loss, coastal lifestyle markets have generally seen a reduction in homes reselling at a loss as values have moved higher over the past year in most regions. Over the December 2016 quarter, the proportion of homes resold at a loss across the regions analysed was recorded at: 1.3% in Illawarra, 1.7% in Newcastle Lake Macquarie, 6.9% in Richmond-Tweed, 5.3% in Mid North Coast, 2.6% in Geelong, 24.5% in Bunbury, 24.8% in Cairns, 10.2% in Gold Coast and 9.3% in Sunshine Coast.

The proportion of homes resold at a loss fell across most of these regions over the past quarter, the exceptions were: Illawarra, Newcastle and Lake Macquarie, Bunbury and Cairns.

Over the quarter, RichmondTweed recorded its lowest proportion of loss-making resales since July 2010. The Mid-North Coast recorded its lowest proportion of loss-making resales since April 2005.

Geelong recorded its lowest proportion of loss-making resales since February 2012.

Across all of these regions the proportion of loss-making resales is substantially lower than it has been over recent years.

It highlights the resurgent confidence in coastal and lifestyle markets which has emerged over the past few years.

It is anticipated that the improvement in overall housing market conditions in major coastal/lifestyle markets will continue in 2017.

12

Proportion of total resales at a loss over time: major coastal markets 35%

Illawarra Newcastle Lake Macquarie Richmond-Tweed Mid North Coast

30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 1996

Dec 2000

Dec 2004

Dec 2008

Dec 2012

Dec 2016

Geelong Bunbury Cairns Gold Coast Sunshine Coast

60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Dec 1996

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Dec 2000

Dec 2004

Dec 2008

Dec 2012

Dec 2016

Units within regional markets are generally showing the largest proportion of loss-making re-sales Proportion of loss-making re-sales, December Quarter 2016 non-capital city SA4 regions and GCCSA regions, houses and units From a national perspective the largest proportion of loss-making resales were located in the following regions:

WA

Western Australia - Wheat Belt Western Australia - Outback Perth Bunbury Warrnambool and South West

Units

Shepparton

Houses

North West

VIC

Melbourne Latrobe - Gippsland Hume Geelong Bendigo Ballarat

TAS

West and North West South East Hobart

SA

South Australia - Outback Barossa - Yorke - Mid North Adelaide Wide Bay Townsville

QLD

Queensland - Outback Mackay Gold Coast Darling Downs - Maranoa

NT

•

Fitzroy (Qld) (44.3%)

•

Townsville (Qld) (42.6%)

•

Outback – Qld (Qld) (36.7%)

•

Wide Bay (Qld) (30.7%)

•

Outback – SA (30.3%)

•

Darwin (NT) (28.0%)

•

Outback – NT (NT) (28.0%)

•

Cairns (Qld) (24.8%)

 Illawarra (NSW) (1.3%)

Cairns Brisbane

 Newcastle and Lake Macquarie (NSW) (1.7%)

Northern Territory - Outback Darwin Sydney

 Sydney (NSW) (1.9%)

Southern Highlands and Shoalhaven Riverina

 Geelong (Vic) (2.6%)

Richmond - Tweed Newcastle and Lake Macquarie

 Melbourne (Vic) (4.0%)

New England and North West

NSW

Outback - WA (WA) (50.1%)

 Southern Highlands and Shoalhaven (NSW) (1.1%)

Fitzroy

Murray

 Mid North Coast (NSW) (5.3%)

Mid North Coast

 Coffs Harbour-Grafton (NSW) (5.8%)

Illawarra Hunter Valley exc Newcastle Far West and Orana

 Bendigo (Vic) (5.9%)

Coffs Harbour - Grafton Central West

 Ballarat (Vic) (6.0%)

Capital Region

AC T

•

The lowest proportion of lossmaking resales were recorded in the following regions:

Toowoomba Sunshine Coast

Australian Capital Territory 0%

13

Mackay (Qld) (58.4%)

Launceston and North East South Australia - South East

ACT

•

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Pain & Gain Sydney council regions Over the December 2016 quarter, 1.9% of Sydney houses and 1.8% of units resold for less than their previous purchase price, which was close to record lows. Although the instance of resale at a loss is so low, none of the Sydney council areas recorded no loss-making resales over the quarter. The highest instances of resales at a loss was within the following council areas were: Fairfield (4.6%), Ashfield (3.8%) and Hunters Hill (3.8%).

Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units 25%

Houses

20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

Dec 2007

Gross loss-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Region Ashfield Auburn Bankstown Blacktown Blue Mountains Botany Bay Burwood Camden Campbelltown Canada Bay Canterbury Fairfield Gosford Hawkesbury Holroyd Hornsby Hunters Hill Hurstville Kogarah Ku-ring-gai Lane Cove Leichhardt Liverpool Manly Marrickville Mosman North Sydney Parramatta Penrith Pittwater Randwick Rockdale Ryde Strathfield Sutherland Shire Sydney The Hills Shire Warringah Waverley Willoughby Wollondilly Woollahra Wyong

14

% of all sales

Median hold period

3.8% 3.3% 3.4% 1.7% 2.5% 3.4% 1.4% 1.0% 1.1% 2.0% 2.1% 4.6% 2.0% 1.1% 2.0% 1.7% 3.8% 0.5% 0.6% 1.3% 2.2% 1.5% 1.8% 1.3% 2.0% 3.1% 2.8% 1.3% 1.9% 1.9% 1.8% 1.1% 1.7% 0.8% 1.3% 2.0% 1.2% 1.8% 0.6% 3.1% 0.9% 3.3% 1.6%

4.4 1.6 1.5 4.1 1.6 3.3 6.6 5.0 5.4 3.4 2.2 3.0 8.8 1.7 7.2 3.9 9.7 6.4 2.1 9.0 1.4 19.1 8.4 8.3 3.9 6.9 6.8 4.5 1.8 3.5 4.0 1.5 2.2 3.5 4.7 3.5 1.4 5.4 7.0 1.6 3.3 4.3 10.1

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

-$638,500 -$501,200 -$1,013,500 -$3,847,619 -$1,263,300 -$488,333 -$130,000 -$417,490 -$569,500 -$1,394,750 -$1,485,000 -$2,228,500 -$1,012,000 -$310,000 -$855,100 -$2,710,400 -$100,000 -$150,000 -$295,000 -$387,000 -$413,301 -$962,334 -$1,089,417 -$1,476,500 -$717,500 -$1,515,000 -$1,198,200 -$672,000 -$894,900 -$1,629,000 -$2,259,000 -$132,000 -$1,809,800 -$505,000 -$3,447,583 -$4,322,500 -$4,377,000 -$2,104,950 -$120,000 -$5,317,750 -$120,000 -$2,391,100 -$1,127,490

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Gross profit-making sales, Dec-16 qtr

Total value of Median loss % of all sales loss -$162,500 -$26,200 -$40,250 -$145,350 -$220,000 -$213,333 -$130,000 -$208,745 -$100,000 -$176,125 -$137,500 -$100,000 -$61,500 -$155,000 -$130,000 -$231,750 -$100,000 -$150,000 -$295,000 -$55,000 -$135,000 -$121,334 -$82,500 -$738,250 -$93,750 -$140,000 -$62,500 -$56,000 -$49,050 -$367,000 -$165,000 -$32,000 -$196,500 -$505,000 -$232,000 -$266,000 -$132,000 -$163,425 -$120,000 -$803,000 -$120,000 -$401,600 -$100,000

Units

96.2% 96.7% 96.6% 98.3% 97.5% 96.6% 98.6% 99.0% 98.9% 98.0% 97.9% 95.4% 98.0% 98.9% 98.0% 98.3% 96.2% 99.5% 99.4% 98.7% 97.8% 98.5% 98.2% 98.8% 98.0% 96.9% 97.2% 98.7% 98.1% 98.1% 98.2% 98.9% 98.3% 99.2% 98.7% 98.0% 98.8% 98.2% 99.4% 96.9% 99.1% 96.7% 98.4%

Median hold Total value of Median profit period profit 8.1 6.8 7.1 7.7 8.6 7.3 8.2 7.8 7.9 6.8 7.4 9.8 8.7 9.4 7.4 10.1 8.4 7.5 8.6 7.6 7.1 7.8 8.3 7.9 9.2 7.3 7.2 7.2 8.2 7.8 8.3 6.9 8.3 6.2 8.6 7.2 10.1 8.4 6.5 8.3 7.9 7.0 8.4

$376,000 $265,000 $355,000 $325,000 $279,500 $454,888 $478,500 $283,000 $295,000 $460,000 $305,000 $332,200 $282,000 $315,000 $281,000 $575,000 $1,130,000 $357,929 $394,800 $845,000 $455,000 $695,500 $305,000 $795,000 $571,500 $812,500 $540,000 $310,000 $295,000 $612,500 $530,000 $322,250 $438,750 $262,500 $493,500 $400,000 $635,000 $632,500 $593,750 $677,500 $320,000 $763,000 $220,000

$57,522,405 $74,430,140 $159,297,315 $290,274,677 $87,376,819 $49,621,888 $48,444,780 $82,867,555 $146,893,688 $202,224,898 $173,488,794 $118,725,721 $222,224,275 $76,312,759 $106,092,562 $226,692,824 $30,550,164 $90,961,796 $84,883,950 $366,796,426 $90,827,165 $154,165,051 $167,215,683 $159,933,859 $135,943,045 $88,755,593 $179,466,638 $193,515,019 $195,574,759 $145,801,451 $244,663,356 $125,082,035 $231,915,306 $65,291,710 $421,283,489 $434,374,570 $363,207,702 $331,908,415 $139,764,632 $190,255,609 $44,957,711 $191,653,999 $185,037,849

Pain & Gain Melbourne council regions Melbourne recorded 1.8% of houses and 10.2% of units reselling at a loss over the December 2016 quarter.

The gap between losses for houses and units has widened considerably over recent years. The Murrindindi council are was the only region with no resale losses over the quarter with Frankston and Nillumbik the only region with less than 1.0% of resales at a loss.

The Melbourne council area recorded the highest instance of resale loss at 23.9% followed

by Mitchell (15.4%) and Port Phillip (9.6%).

Region

15

4.8% 3.7% 6.3% 2.1% 3.1% 1.0% 5.2% 0.7% 4.7% 3.0% 2.3% 3.9% 1.9% 1.5% 1.6% 4.2% 9.4% 1.7% 23.9% 4.4% 15.4% 1.5% 9.2% 1.9% 5.3% 2.2% 0.6% 9.6% 8.4% 3.6% 2.8% 1.3% 8.8% 1.6%

Houses

Units

12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Dec 2004

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Gross loss-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Gross profit-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Median hold Median hold Total value of Total value of Median profit Median loss % of all sales period period loss profit 4.9 -$67,500 -$2,109,701 95.2% 10.5 $353,750 $176,941,378 2.7 -$23,000 -$1,174,750 96.3% 9.1 $612,000 $219,281,320 4.6 -$34,000 -$1,844,132 93.7% 10.2 $653,750 $354,153,508 5.3 -$25,350 -$388,850 97.9% 8.5 $244,000 $121,847,528 5.5 -$29,950 -$472,700 96.9% 6.2 $114,000 $33,889,666 3.3 -$42,465 -$439,965 99.0% 7.5 $181,250 $160,813,544 4.1 -$65,000 -$3,105,540 94.8% 8.9 $342,500 $152,526,753 2.1 -$29,062 -$121,248 99.3% 8.3 $207,000 $138,422,650 3.2 -$18,250 -$2,519,850 95.3% 9.3 $410,000 $225,107,818 5.6 -$17,000 -$292,900 97.0% 8.6 $236,250 $92,734,513 3.4 -$33,000 -$484,400 97.7% 9.7 $328,054 $92,808,420 4.8 -$38,250 -$1,507,500 96.1% 7.9 $135,000 $84,146,108 4.6 -$77,000 -$1,247,344 98.1% 9.1 $363,000 $226,970,644 1.9 -$130,650 -$910,300 98.5% 9.9 $362,000 $164,718,111 5.5 -$70,000 -$70,000 98.4% 8.6 $180,000 $13,879,500 3.4 -$30,000 -$845,600 95.8% 9.4 $534,000 $185,279,824 5.9 -$54,525 -$1,831,750 90.6% 7.6 $273,000 $83,338,812 1.2 -$358,000 -$2,053,000 98.3% 9.4 $346,750 $131,333,124 6.0 -$49,500 -$7,235,469 76.1% 9.3 $133,250 $89,592,736 5.0 -$47,500 -$863,899 95.6% 7.2 $119,750 $50,312,651 5.0 -$39,995 -$148,990 84.6% 5.8 $63,000 $2,332,006 1.6 -$45,000 -$1,135,630 98.5% 9.9 $565,000 $281,417,362 5.5 -$40,500 -$2,709,498 90.8% 9.0 $401,000 $161,529,147 8.9 -$8,000 -$8,000 98.1% 5.8 $75,000 $5,519,075 5.7 -$45,000 -$1,751,598 94.7% 9.1 $291,250 $159,296,061 6.7 -$110,000 -$3,320,503 97.8% 8.1 $270,850 $270,129,357 100.0% 11.0 $172,000 $771,000 1.9 -$379,000 -$379,000 99.4% 9.0 $347,500 $66,646,187 5.9 -$35,680 -$5,666,641 90.4% 9.5 $293,250 $158,130,545 6.3 -$45,500 -$2,087,076 91.6% 10.3 $444,500 $191,705,434 4.5 -$23,500 -$1,511,131 96.4% 11.4 $601,250 $315,982,111 3.9 -$34,950 -$644,900 97.2% 8.2 $204,000 $77,070,767 5.8 -$20,000 -$120,500 98.7% 7.2 $145,000 $83,945,348 5.0 -$35,000 -$1,570,700 91.2% 9.6 $453,000 $141,656,177 3.8 -$130,000 -$875,265 98.4% 8.6 $249,875 $130,531,828

% of all sales

Banyule Bayside Boroondara Brimbank Cardinia Casey Darebin Frankston Glen Eira Greater Dandenong Hobsons Bay Hume Kingston Knox Macedon Ranges Manningham Maribyrnong Maroondah Melbourne Melton Mitchell Monash Moonee Valley Moorabool Moreland Mornington Peninsula Murrindindi Nillumbik Port Phillip Stonnington Whitehorse Whittlesea Wyndham Yarra Yarra Ranges

Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units 14%

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Pain & Gain South-East Queensland council regions Within Brisbane, 4.1% of houses resold in the December 2016 quarter transacted below their previous purchase compared to 21.0% of units.

The gap between losses on houses and units has continued to widen. Across the broader South-East Queensland region, the instances of loss were lowest in: Toowoomba (6.5%), Redland (7.0%) and Brisbane (7.2%). The highest instances of resale loss occurred in: Lockyer Valley (19.5%) and Scenic Rim (15.5%) and Somerset (14.3%).

Brisbane Gold Coast Ipswich Lockyer Valley Logan Moreton Bay Redland Scenic Rim Somerset Sunshine Coast Toowoomba

16

7.2% 10.1% 11.8% 19.5% 7.6% 7.8% 7.0% 15.5% 14.3% 9.3% 6.5%

Houses

Units

20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Gross profit-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Gross loss-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Median hold Total value of Median hold Total value of Median loss % of all sales Median profit period loss period profit 92.8% 9.3 $175,000 $907,188,892 -$26,000 -$12,624,487 6.0 8.3 -$30,000 -$19,087,336 89.9% 8.9 $117,000 $492,795,710 7.5 -$15,000 -$1,892,682 88.2% 8.7 $70,500 $54,839,439 7.2 -$24,000 -$408,650 80.5% 10.1 $64,500 $6,886,700 7.3 -$20,000 -$1,970,114 92.4% 9.4 $93,000 $116,323,791 7.0 -$27,000 -$4,137,912 92.2% 7.9 $80,000 $157,002,206 6.9 -$25,000 -$1,925,750 93.0% 9.0 $100,000 $83,080,909 7.3 -$27,000 -$669,000 84.5% 6.9 $73,250 $11,856,773 6.7 -$35,000 -$209,000 85.7% 9.3 $54,750 $4,249,075 8.7 -$30,000 -$10,510,424 90.7% 8.0 $102,000 $270,139,899 2.6 -$14,000 -$1,180,500 93.5% 7.6 $74,000 $54,170,124

% of all sales

Region

Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units 25%

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Pain & Gain Adelaide council regions In Adelaide, 7.1% of houses and 10.5% of units resold over the December 2016 quarter, transacted below their previous purchase price.

The proportion of loss-making resales trended lower over the quarter for units. The council areas with the highest proportion of loss-making resales over the quarter were: Mallala (100% only 1 sale), Playford (18.3%) and Gawler (12.7%). The Prospect and Walkerville council regions each had no resales at a loss over the quarter.

Region

17

Houses

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Units

Dec 2016

Gross loss-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Gross profit-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Median hold Total value of Median hold Total value of Median loss Median profit % of all sales period period profit loss 5.0% 7.1 -$17,500 -$66,500 95.0% 8.2 $129,500 $12,343,352 6.9% 6.5 -$18,000 -$746,999 93.1% 9.2 $125,000 $17,736,630 6.0% 7.9 -$31,205 -$823,798 94.0% 8.5 $202,500 $34,285,536 3.4% 5.5 -$22,500 -$161,000 96.6% 9.0 $141,000 $21,167,692 9.5% 5.3 -$28,000 -$2,058,592 90.5% 8.7 $116,750 $40,198,401 12.7% 7.2 -$15,000 -$161,700 87.3% 8.7 $46,250 $5,335,849 6.9% 6.0 -$17,500 -$154,300 93.1% 9.6 $144,500 $23,427,337 16.7% 2.1 -$15,000 -$15,000 83.3% 9.5 $161,000 $785,228 100.0% 6.6 -$5,000 -$5,000 8.1% 5.8 -$20,000 -$1,152,188 91.9% 7.8 $108,000 $33,205,698 5.1% 5.7 -$13,000 -$348,750 94.9% 8.8 $177,000 $32,506,780 8.7% 4.4 -$47,500 -$566,500 91.3% 7.2 $50,000 $8,257,109 4.7% 5.9 -$40,000 -$265,500 95.3% 9.3 $174,500 $25,830,940 6.0% 6.5 -$10,000 -$608,050 94.0% 9.0 $80,250 $51,765,107 18.3% 6.3 -$16,500 -$837,500 81.7% 9.2 $48,500 $13,344,229 8.7% 6.4 -$20,000 -$1,473,350 91.3% 8.1 $100,000 $38,758,334 100.0% 7.5 $107,500 $11,060,925 11.5% 6.4 -$20,000 -$1,478,400 88.5% 9.0 $72,000 $29,857,031 6.9% 5.2 -$15,000 -$821,000 93.1% 9.1 $108,500 $34,388,464 2.5% 6.6 -$30,000 -$75,750 97.5% 8.0 $175,000 $30,537,431 100.0% 5.2 $82,500 $2,649,200 8.6% 6.4 -$21,500 -$553,000 91.4% 9.6 $134,000 $24,459,124

% of all sales

Adelaide Adelaide Hills Burnside Campbelltown Charles Sturt Gawler Holdfast Bay Light Mallala Marion Mitcham Mount Barker Norwood Payneham St Peters Onkaparinga Playford Port Adelaide Enfield Prospect Salisbury Tea Tree Gully Unley Walkerville West Torrens

Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units 20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Dec 2004

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Pain & Gain Perth council regions The proportion of dwellings reselling at a loss across Perth has continued to trend higher over the September 2016 quarter. Over the quarter, 18.9% of houses and 33.8% of units resold for less than the previous purchase price. Across the council regions, the areas with the highest proportion of loss-making resales were: Perth (47.8%), Murray (34.1%) and Mandurah (33.5%). Peppermint Grove had no resales at a loss over the quarter while no other council area had less than 10% of resales at a loss.

Region

18

28.3% 13.0% 16.8% 24.0% 23.1% 11.3% 19.5% 16.8% 15.0% 15.4% 16.8% 18.4% 17.5% 12.9% 21.7% 33.5% 14.6% 28.0% 16.0% 34.1% 24.2% 47.8% 23.4% 24.5% 19.2% 20.9% 27.0% 23.5% 22.9% 16.4% 21.2%

Houses

35%

Units

30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Gross loss-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Gross profit-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Median hold Total value of Median hold Total value of Median loss % of all sales Median profit period loss period profit 5.9 -$35,000 -$3,401,660 71.7% 7.9 $190,000 $31,729,080 5.2 -$40,000 -$527,000 87.0% 11.2 $226,000 $10,417,295 4.1 -$39,000 -$1,965,750 83.2% 10.8 $185,000 $27,273,283 5.7 -$50,000 -$1,603,524 76.0% 12.0 $198,000 $16,988,550 5.2 -$38,000 -$1,856,362 76.9% 13.0 $407,250 $34,062,300 4.5 -$38,000 -$1,978,000 88.8% 11.0 $237,000 $59,705,106 7.0 -$42,500 -$512,000 80.5% 11.7 $410,000 $14,776,000 3.3 -$50,000 -$2,824,024 83.2% 9.1 $227,000 $52,106,260 8.4 -$375,500 -$1,035,500 85.0% 15.4 $495,000 $10,987,000 5.0 -$99,250 -$499,500 84.6% 10.9 $104,000 $5,402,500 4.0 -$52,500 -$2,380,000 83.2% 10.5 $225,000 $25,154,037 6.4 -$27,000 -$2,415,005 81.6% 10.7 $173,750 $30,530,353 4.2 -$39,500 -$7,047,174 82.5% 12.1 $260,000 $105,892,567 4.4 -$31,500 -$905,500 87.1% 11.0 $240,000 $30,932,371 4.4 -$20,000 -$806,650 78.3% 7.7 $134,000 $11,714,400 5.5 -$40,000 -$7,734,500 66.5% 11.5 $174,000 $39,630,760 3.6 -$103,112 -$5,388,862 85.4% 11.5 $273,500 $79,361,876 4.8 -$125,000 -$1,516,088 72.0% 14.3 $440,750 $9,002,100 6.8 -$39,000 -$1,016,500 84.0% 12.8 $260,000 $23,156,000 6.6 -$55,000 -$1,135,000 65.9% 7.2 $172,000 $5,320,504 7.1 -$165,000 -$3,348,750 75.8% 11.4 $384,500 $27,937,700 100.0% 12.0 $221,750 $1,668,500 6.2 -$75,000 -$5,755,769 52.2% 11.3 $142,250 $13,959,926 5.6 -$35,000 -$4,129,392 76.6% 8.9 $166,750 $45,577,470 4.0 -$47,500 -$650,500 75.5% 6.7 $231,000 $9,038,375 4.7 -$50,000 -$2,454,500 80.8% 11.2 $238,750 $41,084,463 5.7 -$40,000 -$8,459,920 79.1% 11.1 $209,000 $125,630,350 4.5 -$45,000 -$1,428,612 73.0% 12.0 $225,000 $17,845,200 5.0 -$32,000 -$4,437,372 76.5% 8.9 $204,000 $53,558,401 4.0 -$34,000 -$2,387,000 77.1% 9.5 $165,000 $19,391,039 3.6 -$37,500 -$518,502 83.6% 10.0 $215,000 $17,286,600 5.5 -$31,000 -$5,913,420 78.8% 8.2 $201,500 $91,614,429

% of all sales

Armadale Bassendean Bayswater Belmont Cambridge Canning Claremont Cockburn Cottesloe East Fremantle Fremantle Gosnells Joondalup Kalamunda Kwinana Mandurah Melville Mosman Park Mundaring Murray Nedlands Peppermint Grove Perth Rockingham Serpentine-Jarrahdale South Perth Stirling Subiaco Swan Victoria Park Vincent Wanneroo

Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units 40%

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Pain & Gain Hobart council regions Hobart recorded 8.2% of houses and 9.0% of units reselling at a loss over the December 2016 quarter. The occurrence of resales at a loss has increased over the quarter for houses and fallen for units. The Hobart (3.3%), Clarence (4.8%) and Kingborough (4.8%) council areas had the lowest proportion of loss-making resales over the quarter. The instances of resale loss were much higher in: Derwent Valley (27.8%), Brighton (19.6%) and Sorell (13.1%).

Region Brighton Clarence Derwent Valley Glenorchy Hobart Kingborough Sorell

Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units 30%

Houses

Units

25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

Dec 2007

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Gross loss-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Gross profit-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Median hold Total value of Median hold Total value of Median loss Median profit % of all sales period period loss profit 6.6 -$14,000 -$136,500 80.4% 8.8 $47,000 $2,935,313 4.2 -$33,250 -$452,000 95.2% 8.1 $102,250 $30,183,174 7.9 -$23,500 -$342,250 72.2% 8.3 $15,000 $1,268,975 7.0 -$10,750 -$1,024,600 88.0% 8.7 $69,000 $15,861,293 5.7 -$62,250 -$508,500 96.7% 8.5 $190,000 $38,455,225 6.5 -$23,500 -$357,500 95.2% 6.4 $79,750 $15,471,840 6.1 -$27,500 -$205,000 86.9% 8.1 $65,000 $6,233,700

% of all sales 19.6% 4.8% 27.8% 12.0% 3.3% 4.8% 13.1%

Darwin council regions Over the December 2016 quarter, 22.6% of Darwin houses and 42.3% of Darwin units resold for less than their previous purchase price. The instances of loss-making resales have continued to trend higher over the quarter from their previous record-highs. Across the council areas, Litchfield saw the lowest proportion of lossmaking resales (22.7%) followed by: Palmerston (23.9%) and Darwin (31.1%).

Region Darwin Litchfield Palmerston

19

Loss Making Sales – Houses v Units 50% Houses Units 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004 Dec 2007 Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Gross loss-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Gross profit-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Median hold Total value of Median hold Total value of Median loss % of all sales Median profit period loss period profit 31.1% 5.7 -$56,000 -$4,429,470 68.9% 10.3 $148,638 $19,665,847 22.7% 5.3 -$20,000 -$329,000 77.3% 10.5 $280,000 $4,693,900 23.9% 4.2 -$50,000 -$1,214,090 76.1% 10.5 $201,500 $13,838,472

% of all sales

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Pain & Gain Canberra council regions The performance of house and unit resales across Canberra has continued to diverge over the past quarter.

While only 8.6% of all dwellings resold at a loss over the quarter, this was split by 1.1% of houses and 23.2% of units.

Loss Making Sales - Houses v Units 30%

Houses

Units

25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Dec 2004

Region

20

Dec 2010

Dec 2013

Dec 2016

Gross loss-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Gross profit-making sales, Dec-16 qtr Median hold Median hold Total value of Total value of Median loss % of all sales Median profit period period profit loss $166,100 $208,285,922 91.4% 9.3 5.9 -$20,000 -$2,295,927 8.6%

% of all sales

Unincorporated ACT

Dec 2007

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

About CoreLogic CoreLogic Australia is a wholly owned subsidiary of CoreLogic (NYSE: CLGX), which is the largest property data and analytics company in the world. CoreLogic provides property information, analytics and services across Australia, New Zealand and Asia, and recently expanded its service offering through the purchase of project activity and building cost information provider Cordell. With Australia’s most comprehensive property databases, the company’s combined data offering is derived from public, contributory and proprietary sources and includes over 500 million decision points spanning over three decades of collection, providing detailed coverage of property and other encumbrances such as tenancy, location, hazard risk and related performance information.

With over 20,000 customers and 150,000 end users, CoreLogic is the leading provider of property data, analytics and related services to consumers, investors, real estate, mortgage, finance, banking, building services, insurance, developers, wealth management and government. CoreLogic delivers value to clients through unique data, analytics, workflow technology, advisory and geo spatial services. Clients rely on CoreLogic to help identify and manage growth opportunities, improve performance and mitigate risk. CoreLogic employs over 650 people across Australia and in New Zealand. For more information call 1300 734 318 or visit www.corelogic.com.au Granular Data and Analytics Driving Growth in your Business CoreLogic RP Data produces an advanced suite of housing market analytics that provides key insights for understanding housing market conditions at a granular geographic level. Granular data is often used for portfolio analysis and benchmarking, risk assessments and understanding development feasibility and market sizing. It gives industry professionals valuable modules which provide essential analytics and insights for decision making and strategy formation within the residential property asset class. We can tailor reports to suit your business requirements. Call us on 1300 734 318 or email us at ask@corelogic.com.au or visit us at www.corelogic.com.au

Market Scorecard: Monitor and measure performance of an individual office or a Franchise brand month on month through a detailed view of the Real Estate Listing and Sales market share across Australia. With the ability to gather market share statistics within your active market this product is designed to identify the competing brands and independents at a suburb, postcode, user defined territory and State level. Easily locate growth opportunities and market hotspots allowing you to view the performance of the established offices in these new areas of interest.

Market Trends: Detailed housing market indicators down to the suburb level, with data in time series or snapshot delivered monthly. CoreLogic RP Data’s Market Trends data is segmented across houses and units. The Market Trends data includes key housing market metrics such as median prices, median values, transaction volumes, rental statistics, vendor metrics such as average selling time and vendor discounting rates.

CoreLogic Indices: The suite of CoreLogic Indices range from simple market measurements such as median prices through to repeat sales indices and our flagship hedonic home value indices. The CoreLogic RP Data Hedonic index has been specifically designed to track the value of a portfolio of properties over time and is relied upon by Australian regulators and industry as the most up to date and accurate measurement of housing market performance.

Economist Pack: A suite of indices and indicators designed specifically for Australian economic commentators who require the most up to date and detailed view of housing market conditions. The economist pack includes the CoreLogic RP Data Hedonic indices for capital cities and ‘rest of state’ indices, the stratified hedonic index, hedonic total return index, auction clearance rates and median prices.

Investor Concentration Report: Understanding ownership concentrations is an important part of assessing risk.

Areas with high investor concentrations are typically allocated higher risk ratings due to the over-representation of a particular segment of the market. Through a series of rules and logic, CoreLogic RP Data has flagged the likely ownership type of every residential property nationally as either owner occupied, investor owned or government owned.

Mortgage Market Trend Report: CoreLogic is in a unique position to monitor mortgage related housing market activity. Transaction volumes, dwelling values and mortgage related valuation events all comprise our Mortgage market trend report which provides an invaluable tool for mortgage industry benchmarking and strategy.

21

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Disclaimers In compiling this publication, RP Data Pty Ltd trading as CoreLogic has relied upon information supplied by a number of external sources. CoreLogic does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to CoreLogic for the supply of such information.

Queensland Data Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources and Mines) 2015.

In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws.

South Australian Data This information is based on data supplied by the South Australian Government and is published by permission. The South Australian Government does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the published information or suitability for any purpose of the published information or the underlying data.

New South Wales Data Contains property sales information provided under licence from the Land and Property Information (“LPI”). RP Data is authorised as a Property Sales Information provider by the LPI. Victorian Data The State of Victoria owns the copyright in the Property Sales Data which constitutes the basis of this report and reproduction of that data in any way without the consent of the State of Victoria will constitute a breach of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). The State of Victoria does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this report and any person using or relying upon such information does so on the basis that the State of Victoria accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults, defects or omissions in the information supplied.

Western Australian Data Based on information provided by and with the permission of the Western Australian Land Information Authority (2014) trading as Landgate.

Australian Capital Territory Data The Territory Data is the property of the Australian Capital Territory. No part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be directed to: Director, Customer Services ACT Planning and Land Authority GPO Box 1908 Canberra ACT 2601.

Tasmanian Data This product incorporates data that is copyright owned by the Crown in Right of Tasmania. The data has been used in the product with the permission of the Crown in Right of Tasmania. The Crown in Right of Tasmania and its employees and agents: a) give no warranty regarding the data’s accuracy, completeness, currency or suitability for any particular purpose; and b) do not accept liability howsoever arising, including but not limited to negligence for any loss resulting from the use of or reliance upon the data.

Base data from the LIST © State of Tasmania http://www.thelist.tas.gov.au

22

Pain & Gain Report | December Quarter, 2016

Email us at ask@corelogic.com.au 1300 734 318 www.corelogic.com.au