Real Estate
Valuing your home with the flip of a coin
Setting a price is one of Realtors’ toughest tasks

As Realtors, we know that one of our most difficult tasks is pricing a home. That holds true whether we are representing a seller or a buyer.
One of the great evolutions in real estate over the last decade is the power of the Internet, and more than 90 percent of homebuyers begin their search there. We think that’s great, and buyers are more empowered than ever with loads of information. Some of that information can come from sites like Zillow that offer what’s called an “automated valuation model” – AVM for short – that purportedly presents a great estimate of the current market value of millions of homes.
It’s cool technology, amassing an enormous amount of information from publicly available sources in one place that is then scrubbed through very sophisticated algorithms to predict value. And all of that is presented in an easy-to-use user interface. And to their enormous credit, Zillow has done a tremendous job in reaching “top of mind” status with consumers. There’s just one problem: Those predicted values are wildly inaccurate and inconsistent.
As Realtors, we know that one of our most difficult tasks is pricing a home. That holds true whether we are representing a seller or a buyer. Market pressures change from week to week and from neighborhood to neighborhood. The motivation of the parties is always a factor, as is the condition of a home and those around it. No algorithm, however sophisticated, can quantify the value of a kitchen that was remodeled just before a home was put on the market or a yard that is poorly maintained. It simply isn’t possible for any AVM to predict the value of a home with a level of accuracy sufficient to make a housing decision. Zillow knows that’s true – and they say as much on their website (although you have to dig a bit to find it). They have this to say about their “zestimates” of value:
“The Zestimate is not an appraisal and you won’t be able to use it in place of an appraisal, though you can certainly share it with real estate professionals. It is a computer-generated estimate of the worth of a house today, given the available data. Zillow does not offer the Zestimate as the basis of any specific real-estate-related financial transaction. Our data sources may be incomplete or incorrect; also, we have not physically inspected a specific home. Remember, the Zestimate is a starting point and does not consider all the market intricacies that can determine the actual price a house will sell for.”
Yet not a week goes by that we don’t encounter a consumer who is fixated on a particular value for a home because that’s what Zillow says it is. Kudos to Zillow for making this kind of impression on the public – brilliant marketing. But our research shows that, on average, those “zestimates” are within 5 percent of the actual value of a home just half of the time. (Funny, that’s what their research shows as well.) As Realtors, if we got within 5 percent of the value of a home that infrequently we’d be out of business.
So if a consumer wants to base their valuation of a home purchase or sale on what they find on the Internet, we suggest they take out a coin and flip it. Heads – that value is within 5 percent (high or low) of what the home is actually worth. Tails – that value could be 10 percent, 20 percent or more off target.
How accurate are ‘Zestimates?’
A detailed analysis of 500 recent sales in Metro Washington, D.C.: Beginning in 2010, McEnearney Associates has examined the accuracy of the estimates for property values that Zillow provides – their “zestimates” of value. This marks our fourth and most comprehensive analysis.
We took 500 properties in MRIS, our regional multiple listing system, that were scheduled to settle between March 24 and March 31, 2014. During that week, we looked for the zestimates of those 500 properties. Once the properties settled, we compared the actual sold price to the predicted values on Zillow. And to be as fair as possible, we excluded new home sales from our research because it is highly unlikely that Zillow would have details of the home to be built.
To provide some context, we compared the results of the March 2014 research to that of our September 2012 research. In 2012, we researched 280 properties, and we were able to find a zestimate for all 280. In the research we just concluded, we were able to find values for all but two of the 500 properties.
Generally, Zillow’s predicted market value is not any better now than it was 18 months ago. The zestimate is within 5 percent of the actual sales price roughly half the time. In September 2012, the zestimate was just as likely to be too low as too high; now, it is roughly twice as likely to be too low.
As one might expect with a computer-generated value, there are always “outliers.” In September 2012, of the 280 zestimates, the highest was roughly 140 percent of the actual sales prices. The lowest was 82 percent. In the research we just concluded, the highest predicted value was 256 percent of the actual sales price and the lowest was 62.8 percent.
There are significant geographic differences in Zillow’s performance in our current research. They get within 5 percent of the actual sales price just over a third of the time for properties in Washington, DC, and within 10 percent of the sales price less than 60 percent of the time. They are within 5 percent of sales price 43 percent of the time in Maryland and almost 60 percent in Virginia.
Zillow is a bit less accurate for condo and coops than for attached or detached homes. Mirroring the overall results, in all three property types Zillow is at least twice as likely to predict a value that is at least 5 percent lower than the actual value as predicting 5 percent high.
Not surprisingly, those properties that sold for $1,000,000 and more were a little tougher for Zillow to estimate accurately. They got within 5 percent of the actual price just over one third of the time. They fared much better for homes selling between $500,000 and $999,999, getting within 5 percent almost 60 percent of the time, but for homes selling for less than $500,000 they were within 5 percent less than half the time.
David Howell is executive vice president and chief information officer for McEnearney Associates. He is responsible for the firm’s technology, market information and public relations. He is also principal broker for McEnearney Associates in Maryland, and is an associate broker in Virginia and D.C.
Real Estate
Does Pride decor resemble Trump’s design aesthetic?
Glitter, gold, and rejecting the idea that a home should be understated
Interior design is often a balancing act between taste, personality, and restraint. Sometimes, however, restraint leaves the building entirely. Such is the case when the colorful exuberance of gay Pride-inspired decorating collides with the famously excessive decorating style associated with the current occupant of the White House. The result can be a fascinating study in maximalism, spectacle, and unapologetic visual overload.
Donald Trump’s personal decorating style has long been a subject of debate among designers and critics. Admirers see luxury and grandeur. Critics see something else: a dizzying display of gold leaf, marble, mirrors, crystal, and oversized furnishings that often crosses the line from elegant into what many designers would call tacky. More is rarely enough. If one chandelier sparkles, three are better. If a room has gold accents, why not make every available surface gold? (See Oval Office and ballroom rendition for details.)
In many ways, this excess shares common ground with certain Pride celebrations. Pride has never been about blending into the background. It celebrates visibility, self-expression, individuality, and joy. Rainbow colors, dramatic costumes, glitter, flamboyant artwork, and bold statements have long been part of Pride culture. Yet there is an important difference. Pride’s extravagance is often playful, self-aware, and rooted in personal expression, while Trump’s aesthetic has frequently been criticized for equating luxury with sheer quantity and visual intensity.
Combining these influences creates an interior that could best be described as “glamorous chaos.”
Imagine entering a living room in which gold-trimmed mirrors stretch from floor to ceiling. Crystal chandeliers hang above a bright rainbow velvet sectional. Marble floors gleam beneath metallic furniture that appears determined to reflect every available light source. Pride flags become framed artwork surrounded by ornate gold moldings. A room designed this way doesn’t whisper. It shouts.
Color is central to the concept. Pride-inspired interiors often embrace the full spectrum of colors. Trump’s style, meanwhile, traditionally favors cream, gold, black, and glossy finishes. Combining them means introducing vivid jewel tones against a backdrop of faux-palatial luxury. Emerald green chairs, ruby-red draperies, sapphire-blue accent walls, and gold-trimmed furniture can coexist in a way that feels deliberately theatrical.
The key word is theatrical.
Many professional designers spend years learning how to create visual balance. A Pride-meets-Trump interior intentionally ignores many of those rules. Pattern competes with pattern. Shine competes with shine. Artwork competes with furniture. The eye rarely gets a chance to rest. For some homeowners, that sounds exhausting. For others, it sounds like the perfect party.
Lighting offers another opportunity to embrace excess. Crystal chandeliers, mirrored lamps, illuminated shelves, and color-changing LED lighting can transform a room into something resembling a cross between a luxury hotel lobby and a Pride festival. The goal is not subtlety. The goal is spectacle.
A dining room inspired by this combination might feature a massive glass table, gold dining chairs, rainbow floral arrangements, mirrored walls, and enough crystal accessories to keep a polishing cloth busy year-round. Critics would call it gaudy. Fans would call it fabulous.
Artwork becomes particularly important. Pride-themed pieces featuring LGBTQ+ history, activism, and culture can provide meaning beneath the decorative excess. Without these personal and cultural elements, the room risks becoming little more than a collection of expensive looking, but not necessarily expensive, objects. Pride design can work best when it reflects identity and community rather than simply displaying color for color’s sake.
While normally a haven for restful sleep, bedrooms can take a similar approach. Plush velvet fabrics, oversized tufted headboards, metallic and mirrored finishes, colorful accent lighting, and dramatic artwork create a space that feels more like a boutique hotel suite than a traditional bedroom. Again, the challenge is avoiding the temptation to add one more decorative element to an already crowded visual landscape.
What makes this design combination interesting is that both aesthetics reject the idea that a home should be understated. Both embrace visibility. Both invite attention. Both encourage occupants to take up space unapologetically. Yet where Pride design often celebrates authenticity and self-expression, Trump’s decorating style is frequently criticized for prioritizing conspicuous luxury over cohesion and refinement.
The result is an interior style that many people would consider delightfully outrageous and others would consider a decorating nightmare. Either way, nobody is likely to forget it.
In the end, a Pride-inspired interpretation of Donald Trump’s famously over-the-top aesthetic would be colorful, glittering, excessive, and impossible to ignore. It would break nearly every rule of minimalist design while embracing the philosophy that if something is worth doing, it is worth overdoing. Whether one sees that as fabulous or tacky may depend entirely on how much gold leaf and rainbow velvet one can tolerate in a single room.
Valerie M. Blake is a licensed associate broker in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia with RLAH @properties. Call or text her at 202-246-8602, email her at [email protected] or follow her on Facebook at TheRealst8ofAffairs.
While one would hope it’s easy to calculate a break-even point for a home purchase – such as you could calculate for “how many widgets a month do I need to sell to break even?” It’s not always easy when looking at the return on investment for a home purchase. Condo buildings can lose a view due to new construction next door. Weather patterns can expose deficiencies. Conversely, new dining and entertainment options in a neighborhood can cause home prices to skyrocket. The addition of public transportation and employment options can make a neighborhood more desirable. Or, as we have recently seen in the District of Columbia – an incoming presidential administration can severely affect the “vibe” of an entire city’s economy – for better or for worse.
Homeownership is not necessarily a get rich quick scheme. Most homeowners find that staying in a house for at least 5-10 years – whether owner occupied or not, makes for a significant return on their investment. An owner may not completely pay off a home in 10 years, but they might gain enough equity that they can receive quite a large check when they decide to sell or move. And the old reasoning that “your apartment rental community does not cut you a sizeable check when moving out after 15 years.” still stands. Is homeownership for everyone? Absolutely not. But many have reported other benefits besides purely financial gains. What are those benefits?
- Feeling a sense of community. – homeowners tend to take more pride in their buildings and neighborhoods, because they feel more invested and tend to want to protect their investment. Neighborhood watch programs, getting to know elderly neighbors, forming building wide or cul-de-sac wide favorite TV show watch nights, super bowl parties, and other such communal and social ties lead to an overall sense of wellbeing and help to stabilize a nervous system in uncertain times.
- Feng Shui? Well, maybe there’s something to it. If you have been wanting to customize your own home but live in an apartment, there are many more restrictions on what you can do in a rental, than when you own your own home. Do you want new countertops? Would you love to remove that popcorn ceiling? Open up that kitchen? Convert the back yard into a curated patio/cold plunge/hot tub time machine cookout/spring break adventure campsite of your wildest dreams?
- Forming longer lasting relationships – sharing that CostCo membership with others on your floor, making a pan of lasagna and inviting the neighbors over for dinner, picking your neighbor’s brain for stock investment advice, asking your neighbor’s son to help you create a marketing plan for your new business, hosting the Friendsgiving you dreamed of – there are multitudes of reasons and ways that homeowners tend to feel a sense of community, sharing of resources, and realizing over time that “it takes a village.”
- Higher civic engagement – Studies have shown that homeowners tend to be more politically active in their districts, participate in local school boards, know the names of and how to contact their local representatives to affect change, etc. Having a higher financial investment in and a commitment to stay in a neighborhood beyond just one or two years makes a big difference in who decides to show up at election time, especially for local elections.
If you would like to know more about the research on homeownership, feel free to read the report from the National Association of Realtors here.
Joseph Hudson is a referral agent with RLAH. Reach him at 703-587-0597 or [email protected].
Real Estate
D.C.’s housing reality: Cautious optimism meets landlord strain
Cost of living remains a major problem
Washington has long prided itself on stability. Anchored by the federal government and buoyed by a highly educated workforce, the District has historically weathered economic uncertainty better than most cities.
But beneath that stability, cracks have been showing since January 2025.
I was having a conversation with a prospective client the other day and offered him a candid assessment of the District’s economic outlook. Simply put, structural challenges have been shaping the city’s future, a new mayoral election, and more that blends cautious optimism with clear concern about the changes ahead.
For one, the long-term shift toward remote and hybrid work continues to reshape the city in ways many people still underestimate. There has been a change in the rhythm of downtown D.C., reduced daytime foot traffic for local businesses, and created uncertainty for commercial real estate owners and the neighborhoods that depended on those workers every day.
At the same time, the cost of living in the District continues to rise at a pace that many residents are struggling to absorb. Even residents with strong incomes are becoming more cautious about spending and relocation decisions.
Landlords are feeling those pressures as well. Many smaller housing providers are operating in an environment where expenses continue to rise faster than revenue while the regulatory environment has grown increasingly complex. For some rental owners, especially those with older buildings or only a few rental units, the math is making it harder to cover costs, much less generate passive income.
There is also growing concern about the District government’s own financial outlook. Significant budget pressures and spending cuts are being had in a more serious way than many Washingtonians are used to hearing. As uncertainty in federal employment affects local tax revenue and consumer confidence, how will the city fund services, infrastructure, housing programs, and public safety priorities in the years ahead?
At the same time, consumer confidence feels noticeably down than it did even a few years ago. People are taking longer to make decisions, whether that means signing a lease, purchasing a home, renovating a property, or expanding a business. That hesitation creates a slower-moving marketplace where caution often replaces momentum.
Despite all this, Washington has proven remarkably resilient over time. The city continues to attract talented professionals, international investment, universities, healthcare institutions, and industries tied to government, law, technology, and public policy. Neighborhoods continue to evolve, and demand for well-managed rental housing remains strong in the core areas of the city.
Unlike other major cities driven by private industry, federal employment and contracting are two of the main pillars of Washington’s economy. That reliance has long insulated the region from deep recessions. But it also creates vulnerability when federal activity slows.
D.C.’s economy is far more interconnected and interdependent than many people fully appreciate. Between significant federal layoffs, the District’s high unemployment rate, and broader economic uncertainty, there are a number of warning signs that property owners should be paying close attention to. When federal hiring slows or contracts tighten, the impact extends well beyond government workers themselves. It affects restaurants, retail, housing, and countless other sectors tied to the District’s economic activity.
Brookings Institution has documented how job losses in higher-income sectors can disproportionately impact urban economies—precisely because those workers drive local spending.
Research from the Urban Institute supports this view, noting that federal workforce disruptions can quickly ripple through the region’s economy. For landlords and renters alike, those ripples are already being felt. Renters see many more properties on the market which gives them leverage on negotiating discounts in rent or special incentives. Housing providers, already squeezed by the reality of a weak economy and strong regulations face lowering rents and income.
For years, affordability has been one of D.C.’s most persistent challenges. Much of that pressure has been driven by strong job growth and sustained demand for housing at a pace that new housing inventory has struggled to match. That imbalance has steadily pushed rents and home prices higher, leaving many residents financially stretched.
Recent multifamily housing data suggests the market is already beginning to adjust. Developers delivered more than 15,000 apartment units across the Washington metropolitan area over the past year, and several industry reports have noted that elevated supply levels, combined with slower demand growth, have contributed to softer occupancy levels and downward pressure on rents in portions of the region. CoStar, CBRE, and Northmarq have all reported rising vacancy rates across segments of the D.C. multifamily market as newly delivered Class A inventory continues entering the pipeline at a time when hiring growth has moderated and federal workforce uncertainty has increased.
At the same time, several economists and housing analysts have cautioned that the District’s affordability challenges are deeply structural and unlikely to disappear quickly. The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University has repeatedly identified Washington among the nation’s more cost-burdened metropolitan areas, particularly for renters, while Zillow data continues to show housing costs consuming a substantial percentage of household income for many residents.
From my own perspective as a property manager working directly in the market every day, I believe we are beginning to see the early stages of a market recalibration rather than a collapse. Anecdotally, there appears to be more competition among larger apartment buildings than there was several years ago, particularly in neighborhoods where substantial new inventory has recently delivered. That does not necessarily mean dramatic rent declines are coming, but it does suggest that the imbalance between supply and demand may be moderating somewhat after years of sustained upward pressure on pricing.
Even if prices soften, affordability will remain a long-term challenge.
Regulation and the Realities of Tenant Turnover
The same rental owner I spoke with pointed to regulatory hurdles as a major source of hesitation to continue renting out his property, given past bad experiences with tenants and excessive costs to prepare the rental for a new tenant.
For many small property owners, the cumulative weight of regulation, maintenance costs, and market uncertainty is becoming harder to bear. Clients of mine have described feeling overwhelmed, not just financially, but emotionally. What was once a source of pride has, in some cases, become a source of stress.
We’re seeing more small landlords sell their rental homes, questioning whether it’s worth staying in the market. That’s a significant shift from even five or ten years ago. The National Multifamily Housing Council has noted that regulatory complexity often disproportionately impacts smaller landlords, who lack the resources of larger firms.
Some are choosing to sell. Others are simply trying to hold on. The result is the same – less rental housing for DC residents.
A Shift From Pride to Disillusionment
Perhaps the most striking theme is the emotional shift described by the property owner. For some, owning property in D.C., once a milestone achievement, has become a source of disillusionment. They cited financial losses, regulatory frustration, and a growing sense of political alienation.
There are also broader concerns about:
- The decline of small multifamily ownership
- Rising foreclosures in certain segments
- Increased consolidation by larger institutional landlords
If small landlords continue to exit the market, it changes the entire housing ecosystem. You lose diversity in housing options, and that can have long-term consequences for affordability. It also robs families of having homes large enough to live in.
Politics and Policy: A System at a Standstill?
The political environment has obviously been a key factor shaping the city’s housing future. Following the 2026 elections, a lack of significant leadership change may result in continued policy stagnation.
Without meaningful policy shifts, we’re likely to see more of the same: continued and increasing pressure on landlords and not enough study and focus on policies to increase housing supply by first stopping those property owners fleeing the District’s extreme tenant friendliness. The D.C. City Council remains central to these decisions, with advocacy groups continuing to push for expanded tenant protections. The importance of balance cannot be understated: ensuring protections for renters while maintaining a viable environment for housing providers.
Taken together, these dynamics point to a housing system at a crossroads.
D.C. must find a way to balance:
- Tenant protections
- Housing affordability
- Landlord sustainability
- Long-term investment in housing supply
What’s Next?
D.C. isn’t going anywhere. The question is how it adapts. If we can find the right balance, there’s a path forward, but it’s going to take time and thoughtful policy decisions. For landlords, that path will require adaptability and engagement. For renters, it may mean gradual rather than immediate relief. For policymakers, it presents a clear challenge: create a system that works for everyone.
Scott Bloom is owner and senior property manager of Columbia Property Management. Contact him via ColumbiaPM.com.
