Fixed-spine institutional study, directly comparable across all covered metros. As of 2026-03-31 (Green Street 2026Q1 release). Every exhibit carries its source and chart id.
| Occupancy | 93.8% |
| Effective rent | $1,539 |
| Demand growth (YoY) | 2.1% |
| Supply growth (YoY) | 2.1% |
| Permits, T12 % of inventory | 3.17% |
| 3-yr cum. gap (demand−supply) | 0.43% |
| Balance read | UNDERBUILT |
| Undersupply rank (of 37) | #11 |
| Scenario demand rank (avg) | #15.4 |
| Liquidity, trailing 12m* | 25 trades · $0.9B |
| Shadow supply / SFR exposure | Moderate — single-family share of residential permits 49% (Census BPS CBSA, T12) |
| Climate event risk (GS) | Average |
| Months of supply / regime flip** | 1,758 units excess ≈ nan mo at net absorption · no flip by 2031Q1 (baseline) |
*Liquidity: metro apartment transactions from Green Street sales comps (f11), complete monthly windows Jul 2025–Jul 2026; counts reflect recorded trades and platform backfill lag — a coverage-limited overlay, not a census. **Regime flip: occupancy vs the metro's own long-run equilibrium; months at NET absorption (demand minus new supply, baseline); flip = first quarter the GS scenario occupancy path crosses equilibrium; horizon ends 2031Q1. Inventory and equilibrium are stated assumptions pending Census validation — see glossary/data-requests.
Shadow supply / SFR exposure: Census BPS 1-unit permits by CBSA summed trailing 12 months, compared with Green Street 5+ unit apartment permits. This is a free-public competition screen, not a rank or recommendation.
What it shows: how fast Richmond has added apartment stock each year since 2001, and what today's permitting implies about the next wave. How to read it: bars above ~2% are heavy building years; the gold line is a leading indicator roughly 18-24 months ahead of deliveries. Caveat: permits are metro-wide 5+ unit permits — not all become starts.
What it shows: growth in occupied apartments in Richmond against the job engine behind it. How to read it: demand tracks employment over time; sustained demand above jobs means rentership share is rising. Caveat: demand growth is Green Street's occupied-stock measure, annual employment is labelled at year-end quarters.
What it shows: how much of Richmond's apartment demand is explained by household formation, and how much is residual. How to read it: grey bars are households; the colored stack on top is the residual — renter-share shifts, migration and measurement noise, deliberately NOT attributed further (no invented coefficients). Sustained green residual = demand running beyond household formation (durable only if migration/affordability pressure persists). Caveat: drivers are explanatory, not causal proof; annual grains differ (households @Q4, demand = annual average).
What it shows: the running scoreboard of demand minus supply for Richmond. How to read it: green quarters mean the market absorbed more than it built; the ink line is the cumulative balance since 2001 — rising line = tightening market. Current 3-yr balance: 0.43% (underbuilt). Caveat: ±0.25pp threshold for the under/overbuilt label is a stated heuristic.
What it shows: what buyers pay for Richmond apartment cash flow (cap rate) and where values sit (CPPI). How to read it: falling cap rate + rising CPPI = cycle upswing; the spread between the two lines' turns marks repricing episodes. Caveat: quarterly since 2005; 2026Q2 point is a current-quarter estimate.
What it shows: the develop-timing answer for Richmond in one picture. The gold band is the metro's own occupancy equilibrium (Census-validated anchor); the lines are Green Street's five occupancy paths; a dotted vertical marks where each scenario crosses — the regime flip. The ink dash-dot line works the baseline flip back 8 quarters of construction: the quarter you must be OUT OF THE GROUND to be in lease when the market turns. Baseline shows no re-tightening by 2031Q1 — timing offers no rescue here; entry is a basis decision, not a clock decision. Caveats: horizon ends 2031Q1; 8-quarter build is a stated assumption; scenario paths are GS model output, not observed pipeline beyond ~2028.
What it shows: Green Street's five demand paths for Richmond, against their baseline supply path. How to read it: where the fan sits above the dotted supply line, the market tightens even in that scenario. Caveat: alternative scenarios exist only post-2026Q1; supply shown is baseline-only for legibility.
What it shows: the NATIONAL securitized-debt cycle — this panel is deliberately national, not metro-level (deal databases have no reliable metro tags). How to read it: heavy issuance with rising multifamily share = easy credit for apartment deals — historically a late-cycle signal; issuance droughts (2008-11, 2023) mark credit crunches. Caveat: post-GFC quarters have very few deals, so the share line spikes to 100% on 2-3 agency deals.
What it shows: whether Richmond's supply-demand gap opens or closes across all five scenarios over the next 14 quarters. How to read it: green bars right of zero mean deliveries land into unmet demand. 0 of 5 scenarios show the gap widening. Verdict: Undersupplied today, but forward scenarios mostly close the gap. The window favors projects delivering within ~2 years; later deliveries face a more balanced market.
Develop-window verdict: Undersupplied today, but forward scenarios mostly close the gap. The window favors projects delivering within ~2 years; later deliveries face a more balanced market.
Entry screen — PREPARE: To buy here: transaction depth would need to build ($0.9B/12m vs $1.7B median); no start quarter delivers into undersupply on the baseline path. (fundamentals · liquidity · delivery window; internal screen, not a public rating)