With markets feeling more segmented lately, I've been rethinking how I anchor ARV during early deal analysis.
Instead of relying on a single comp or peak-sale comparison, I’ve been leaning toward: • ARV ranges (low / mid / high) rather than one number • Heavier weighting on the most recent 60–90 day sales • Noting spread between list vs. sold prices in the same pocket • Treating appreciation as a bonus, not a given
I’m finding that even within the same zip code, buyer demand and pricing tolerance can shift block by block depending on condition, financing availability, and buyer profile.
Curious how others are handling market data right now: Are you tightening ARV assumptions, using wider ranges, or changing how you comp altogether?
Lender · Southwest Georgia · Member since 2017 · 312 posts · 278 votes
9mo
So when I am looking at deals right now, I am looking at the most recent sales comps and making sure to take out the higher end outliers. Really focusing on the median price of comps and not the average. I would also look at 2026 growth to be 1.5-2.5%, so not much growth at all.
Also in our market, we are seeing a big difference in the amount of sales between price points above 300,000 and below 300,000.
Hinton, WV · Member since 2026 · 1k+ posts · 373 votes
7mo
Been conservative with comps older than 60 days - market's moving too fast to trust 90+ day sales. Also started factoring in time on market more heavily. A house that sat 120 days vs 30 tells you something about that price point. What's your biggest challenge with ARV right now - finding good comps or deciding how much weight to give recent sales?