CSO Residential Property Price Index - megathread


This has been corrected now, I didn’t realise the releases can be edited post-release


Me neither! :astonished:
Need to review my entire copy of the data, especially before they redo the whole thing in September!


You should be OK, it was only the commentary that was edited, no change in the data. However you never know!


Just to be sure I’ve taken the ongoing precaution of automatically downloading the numbers from the CSO statbank, instead of scraping them by hand from the monthly reports.


Anyone know if we are getting July stats before they move to new index next month?


It would appear not.

This weeks release calendar has no mention and they said new series due early Sep so maybe next week

cso.ie/en/newsandevents/stat … ecalendar/


Not out next week either

cso.ie/en/newsandevents/stat … ecalendar/


The new index is out next Wed

cso.ie/en/newsandevents/stat … ecalendar/


This is out now.

Glossier anyway. Yet not final - June and July are both provisional figures. They’ve gone and recalculated figures going back I think to 2005 - concluding that “The new RPPI price model indicates that cash buyers generally paid less for residential property than mortgage buyers, all other things being equal, over the period 2010 to 2016”.

There’s also a chart of the new index against the old one - and since 2010, the new index is generally 4/5% points lower than the old one. On the basis of a house bought for E400k in 2008, this difference wiped E15k off the value - or in other words, the previous index overstated the value by E15k. The document notes that the new chart can be used for calculating the value of a house of known value since 2005, which I don’t recall previous releases saying.

The chart starts in 2005 - I don’t know where figures came from back then (Revenue? No public price register of course), but there’s not much difference up until 2010.

I’m sure media will just pick up on the relatively big increases in July, even though they’re from a lower base and are provisional.

Over to the pin for more enlightened comment!


So cash buyers are getting lower prices v’s their mortgaged cousins.
And all homeowners are 15k less well off than they had previously imagined. It’s a crisis. The Govt needs to fix this asap!


The fall was bigger but so was the recovery :slight_smile:


In a nutshell.

If the cash purchases had been added into the averages over the last few years then I wonder what impact that would have had on sentiment, would have diluted the headlines a little, that wouldn’t have suited the narrative.


The relative recovery was bigger - so this would have amplified the headline.



Ah well fuck that, after buying in D4, I’ll have to move now :angry:

Socodub, I need reassurance please that I live in the best part of Dublin.


One thing I still don’t understand is whether all those vulture fund block purchases of residential properties are now in the index. It’s not at all clear from the report. It says they are now basing the index on stamp duty returns to Revenue instead of mortgage data. That’s fine but a number of the block purchases appear as large single transactions on the PPR, not broken down into individual dwellings at all.

The new RPPI blurb says that “other characteristics used in the index model are obtained by linking this information, at transaction level, with other sources”, and they include floor area, BER, and “locational characteristics” (basically “poshness”). But some of those block purchases are not split out at PPR (and presumably e-Stamping) transaction level. Does that mean they are excluded, or might the CSO have done the splitting up themselves which is often possible from the address information?

There is a cryptic reference to “household market purchases” which I suspect means only private/non-institutional buyers. It also says: “as well as the RPPI, additional indicators for volume, value and average price of all residential property transactions (i.e. not confined to household market purchases) are also being compiled”. That implies that the RPPI itself contains only these “household market purchases” and lends credence to the idea that the vulture fund blocks are excluded.

So what we’re getting is still the special higher price for Paddy. :angry:


Of course, you are right. Silly me. :-GC


This isn’t normalised for property type, of course. I’d say there are far more apartment in Dublin 4 than Dublin 6.


they seem reluctant to highlight the change

eg under the old method the increase in say Dublin from trough to now was X under the new its Y

anyone have the figures to hand ?


Yes. See the new Pretty Charts post here.

The main RPPI entry (highlighted in red) is the new index. A couple of lines underneath is another link to the old index. Open them in two browser tabs and set to view the same statistic in each. You can flick between tabs to see a good visualisation of the changes between the two. There are also links to tabular data for each one at the bottom of the screen - click the raw data link.

EDIT: Note, old index runs to June only, new index to July.


CSO Updated Residential Property Price Index – July 2016 & Overall figures:

cso.ie/en/releasesandpublication … pi/rppi16/


  1. Per the official PPR there were 21,112 Property Purchases in Jan-Jun 2016 as at 22/9/16.
    Per BPFI there were 11,400 Mortgage Drawdowns in Jan-Jun 2016. See here for details viewtopic.php?f=4&t=26451&p=814001
    Therefore 46.0% of all Sales were Cash purchases to date in 2016.
    This compares to 47.5% cash sales in 2015, 50.7% in 2014 and 52.3% in 2013.

  2. As of September 2016 the Index has been updated to now cover all market purchases of houses and apartments by households, both cash and mortgage-based transactions. All previous figures have been revised using this new method to January 2005.

  3. This index is a lagging indicator of the Irish mortgage market. These houses were probably Sale Agreed 3-6 months ago, depending on how long it took for the sale to go through. So it may no longer be reflective of current market conditions.