Today's housing starts number is merely the latest datapoint confirms the housing bottom callers will be once again early. In March, housing starts, expected to print at 705K (which is crawling along the bottom as is, so it is all mostly noise anyway, but the algos care), came at a disappointing 654K, the lowest since October 2011, and a third consecutive decline since January. Want proof that the record warm Q1 pulled demand forward? This is it. As the chart below shows, the all important single-unit housing starts have not budged at all since June 2009. So was there any good news in today's data? Well, housing permits, which means not even $1 dollar has been invested in actually 'building' a home soared to 747K, from 715K in February, and well above expectations of 710K - the highest since September 2008. That a permit is largley meaningless if unaccompanied by a start, not to mention an actual completion goes without saying. However, what is notable is that even the permit dat was skewed: single unit structures came at 462K, lower than February's 479K. Where the ramp was in 5 units or more, aka multi-apartment units, aka straight to rental. It appears that now everyone is piggybacking on the administartion's REO-to-rent plan, and instead of buying "home to buy", all future constrcution will be apartments to rent. Which is great: since rents have been going up, builders are already redirecting their attention to the one segment in the market that is not moribund. As a result, in a few short months expect a glut of rental properties, which will kill even the incipient possibility of a recovery, as the supply drowns any latent demand, as more and more households shifts from owner to renter mentality.
Housing starts: single vs multi-unit. One can be excused for confusing the all important red line for a flat line. It is.
[4]
As for permits, note the increasing spread between single and total units, or in other words, the implicit bet on an increase in rental demand:
[5]