[pesto]

Not sure where to drop this article so decided to drop it here. Seems we're second in other ways too but this is astonishing. Cities ranked by total real estate value.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/these-are-the-most-valuable-cities-in-the-us

Interesting. Hard to understand what exact areas are being compared to each other.

 

[pesto]

It's strange to see Los Angeles listed behind New York when not only both cities had the same exact amount of $2.6 trillion in real estate value, but when L.A. scored a much higher number in the median home value ($622,000).
Or maybe I misinterpreted the introduction of the article

There are a few problems with the article.

First, I'm not sure it has any meaning to compare annual GDP of a country with the real estate value of a city or metro area. One is a measure of production over time, the other a valuation of real estate assets at a moment in time.

There also seems to be a disconnect between the values in the text and those in the list at the end.

It would also be nice to see their definition of the boundaries of the geographic areas they are comparing. They seem to be metro areas, but what exactly that includes for Lending Tree is not clear.

 

[pesto]

Unsure but doing a secondary search seems to validate although numbers are a tad off. San Jose is off the chart.

https://www.kiplinger.com/tool/real...e-prices-in-100-top-u-s-metro-areas/index.php

These are average per house numbers, not gross numbers.

Lending Tree clearly seems to be metro areas but it's not clear if LA includes the IE or the OC; if SJ and SF are combined; or how much of NJ, Connecticut and Pennsylvania is attached to NY.