 |
|
|
|||||
Want more housing market stories from Lance Lamberts ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter. Earlier this month, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) released its annual survey, which found that the median age of first-time U.S. homebuyers in 2025 climbed to 40. Thats up from 38 in 2024and far above the median age in 1992, when it was 28. At first glance, it appears that deteriorating housing affordabilitydriven by the Pandemic Housing Boom and the 2022 mortgage-rate shockhas pushed the age of first-time buyers higher. However, when you look across other data sources, including the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the U.S. Census Bureau, you dont see the same spike. ResiClub dug deeper into the data to figure out whats really going on. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the average first-time homebuyer in 2024 was 36.3 years oldjust a little younger than NARs estimate of the median first-time homebuyer age of 38 in 2024. Initially, one might suspect the difference simply stems from the fact that the New York Fed reports an average while NAR reports a median. However, when you peel back the onion, youll see theres a large historical divergence between the two organizations figures. That raises the question: How did they each collect their data? The NAR data series is calculated by an annual survey. For this year’s survey, NAR mailed out a 120-question survey to 173,250 recent homebuyers. The recent homebuyers had to have purchased a primary residence home between July 2024 and June 2025. In total, 6,103 responses were received this year. The New York Fed doesnt collect its data by survey. Instead, its looking at credit report data, which it says has 5% of nationally representative individuals since 1999. Back in August, ResiClub emailed both NAR and the New York Fed to get their thoughts on the first-time homebuyer data divergence. Jessica Lautz, NARs deputy chief economist, told ResiClub on August 14: “The Federal Reserve is basing their data on credit data. The Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers [from NAR] is based on a survey of those who purchased a primary residence home in the last year. Thus, the NAR survey includes the 9% of first-time buyers who paid cash for their home and did not finance their purchase. Excluded are first-time buyers who purchased a vacation home or mom-and-pop rental as their first purchase. A trend which has popularized as young adults are unable to achieve homeownership in the expensive areas they may live in. The NAR data collection is mid 2023 to mid 2024 vs. a calendar year. Lastly, NAR uses medians as a measure of central tendency vs. average.” Donghoon Lee, an economic research adviser in microeconomics at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, told ResiClub on August 13: “We cant tell you how the NAR annual survey was constructed, but in our previous blog, we wrote about a comparison between our data and NAR source. Here are some of the unsophisticated differences. New York Fed Consumer Credit Panel is a panel of credit report data where we follow 5% of nationally representative individuals since 1999, and is not a survey. We are not subject to any low response rate issue of the respondents. We identify first-time homebuyers when a mortgage account appears for the first time on the individuals credit reports. If a home purchase was made without a mortgage (such as a cash purchase) then we dont see thm, and not included in calculating the statistics. My takeaway? Im going to take this particular first-time homebuyer dataespecially the NAR serieswith a grain of salt going forward. Instead, Ill lean more on generational homeownership rates by age. And when you look at those figures, they clearly confirm that younger generations are entering homeownership more slowly than their older peers. ResiClub also messaged Apartment List to get its latest calculation. See below: Apartment Lists analysis shows that with each successive generation, homeownership rates take longer to ramp up. This pattern isnt unique to Gen Zbaby boomers were slower to reach key homeownership milestones than the Silent Generation, Gen X was slower than the boomers, millennials were slower than Gen X, and Gen Z is slower still. The fact that each generation takes a little longer to enter homeownershipduring both periods of good and poor housing affordabilitysuggests an underlying secular shift that isnt just driven by affordability. In my view, that secular shift largely comes down to lifestyle/cultural shifts. With each new generation, Americans are spending more years in school, marrying later, having children later (and having fewer kids), and ultimately buying homes later. I call this phenomenon lifestyle delays. Given how homeownership rates are calculated (the number of owner-occupied housing units divided by the total number of occupied housing units), its likely that the gradual slowdown in homeownership by generation is actually understating the true drop-off. In plain English, what do I mean? If someone in their twenties or thirties is still living with their parents, they technically arent counted as their own household and therefore arent included in the denominator. And when you look closely at the generational data (see the Apartment List analysis above), youll note that with each generation, Americans are taking longer to move out of their parents homes. If you adjust for this, the real homeownership rates by generationsomething John Burns Research and Consulting has analyzedyou find that the generational homeownership drop-off is indeed larger than the headline data suggests.
Category:
E-Commerce
President Trump recently promised to make America the “crypto capital of the world.” And his administration is working hard to make that pledge a reality. White House officials have established a working group on digital asset markets and directed federal agencies to craft a strategy to cement U.S. leadership. The president’s legislative team, meanwhile, helped push the GENIUS Act (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act),through Congress earlier this summer, thus creating the first federal framework for stablecoins. And they’re working to pass the Clarity Act (Digital Asset Market Clarity Act), which would finally settle disputes over which regulator oversees digital assets. It’s refreshing to see our political leaders working to bring digital assets into the financial mainstream, especially after years of hostility from the prior administration. But the work is far from finishedand achieving universal legitimacy will require not just favorable laws and regulations, but also behavioral changes at leading crypto firms. Conflicting guidance For more than a decade, crypto innovators faced a patchwork of state regimes and conflicting federal guidance. The lack of clear regulation led to a proliferation of scams and bad actorsand kept many investors on the sidelines. Big banks and other legacy financial institutions hesitated to adopt cryptocurrencies and the underlying blockchain technology they’re based on, even as top financiers acknowledged blockchain’s potential to reshape the entire industry. The GENIUS Act represents Washington’s first serious attempt to genuinely regulaterather than ignore or suppressone of the leading forms of cryptocurrency. The new law requires stablecoin issuers to maintain dollar-for-dollar reserves and submit to audits. Far from rejecting this level of regulation, crypto leaders practically begged for it. They recognized that federal oversight and transparent standards are needed to transform what the public previously viewed as a speculative product into a reliable payment instrument. That’s why industry leaders are also working with the White House and Congress to finalize the Clarity Act, which would define the boundaries of authority between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, delivering the kind of predictability that underpins every functioning capital market. Cultural shift But better regulation alone won’t bring about the mainstream approval that industry leaders seek. Only an internal cultural shiftand rigorous self-policingcan deliver that. Every blockchain transaction depends on various forms of intellectual propertyfrom patents on mobile crypto wallets and bitcoin mining data centers to trade secrets in proprietary trading algorithms, and copyrights protecting exchange software to trademarks that build consumer trust. Coinbase, for instance, holds nearly 200 active patents. But most of the intellectual property powering today’s blockchain activity belongs to third parties outside the crypto industry. Yet even as leading platforms generate billions in revenue, the industry remains reluctant to acknowledge the legitimacy of IP rights. This reluctance is playing out in court. In May, Bancor’s nonprofit arm sued Uniswap, alleging that the leading decentralized exchange built its multibillion-dollar business on Bancor’s patented automated market maker technology without authorization. And earlier this summer, Malikie Innovations filed suits against Core Scientific and Marathon Digital, claiming their bitcoin mining operations infringe on Malikie’s patents for elliptic curve cryptography. Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC), a cryptographic technique developed and patented by Certicom years before crypto went mainstream, was licensed by companies like Cisco and Motorola as well as the National Security Agency. Cases like these highlight the tension: Crypto companies depend on IP to function, but too many are willing to disregard the IP rights of others, even as they clamor for legitimacy. Not how respectable companies operate This simply isn’t the way respectable companies in mature industries operate. Spotify and Apple Music wouldn’t enjoy their positive reputations if they refused to pay royalties to artists and record labels. Streaming platforms like Netflix and Hulu would be pariahs if they pirated films. Banks would be shunned by investors alike if they treated software licenses as optional. If leading crypto firms want to be seen as respectable, investable pillars of the global economy, they need to meet those same standards when it comes to intellectual property. Digital assets are here to stay. But universal legitimacy will come only from a combination of comprehensive regulation and a cultural shift within the industry itself.
Category:
E-Commerce
If you slip a tiny wearable device on your fingertip and slide it over a smooth surface like a touchscreen, you can feel digital textures like denim or mesh. The device, designed by researchers at Northwestern University, is the first of its kind to achieve human resolution, meaning that it can more accurately match the complex way a human fingertip senses the world. In previous attempts at haptic devices like this, once you compare them to real textures, you realize theres something still missing, says Sylvia Tan, a PhD student at Northwestern and one of the authors of a new study in Science Advances about the research. Its close, but not quite there. Our work is trying to just get that one step closer. [Photo: Northwestern University] The wearable, made from flexible, paper-thin latex, is embedded with tiny nodes that push into the skin in a precise way and can move up to 800 times per second. Past devices had low resolutionthe touch equivalent of a pixelated image or an early movie from the 1890s with so few frames that the movement looks jerky. Using nodes and arranging them in a particular density improves that resolution. [Photo: Northwestern University] Earlier devices were also bulky. The ultrathin new technology, which weighs less than a gram, is designed to be comfortable to wear. A big goal was to make it very lightweight so you arent distracted by it, Tan says. And [to make] something that we call ‘haptically transparent’that means that even when youre wearing it, you can still perceive the real world, so you can perform everyday tasks. [Photo: Northwestern University] In the study, users could identify fabrics like corduroy or leather with 81% accuracy. The technology is still in development, but in the future, it could make it possible to feel products as you shop online. It could also have more immediate uses for people who are visually impaired, like making it possible to feel a tactile map or translating text on a screen to braille without a large, expensive device. On devices like microwaves, where physical buttons have often been replaced by flat touchscreens, the wearable could help a visually impaired person know where to push. It could also help improve human-robot interfaces. “In the medical field, the Da Vinci robot has very good kinesthetic force feedback,” Tan says. “But getting a surgeon to feel exactly what’s happening at your fingertip as you move the angle of your finger is not quite there. And that’s very important for high-skill workers.”
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||