Home appreciation in Sacramento, CA
Over the five years ending 2025, home prices in Sacramento, CA grew an average of 6.4% a year.
Price growth at a glance
1-year
+1.3%
2025 over 2024. California: +1.9%.
5-year, per year
+6.4%
Average annual growth, 2020 to 2025. California: +7.2%.
10-year, per year
+6.4%
+86.0% in total since 2015. California: +6.3%.
How does your home compare?
Sacramento, CA home prices rose 86.0% over the ten years to 2025, while its ZIP codes ranged from +45.8% to +152.8%. Look up your home to see where it ranks among the homes around it.
Your first analysis is free.
A model-generated estimate and analytical context, not investment advice. Investing? Score any property free
How Sacramento, CA compares with California
California averaged +7.2% a year, putting Sacramento, CA behind the state overall. For five-year price growth, Sacramento, CA ranks 377th out of 409 metros nationwide and 18th out of 28 in California.
| Year | Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA | California |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 Q1 | 100 | 100 |
| 2005 Q2 | 106 | 106 |
| 2005 Q3 | 110 | 111 |
| 2005 Q4 | 113 | 116 |
| 2006 Q1 | 112 | 119 |
| 2006 Q2 | 111 | 120 |
| 2006 Q3 | 109 | 120 |
| 2006 Q4 | 108 | 119 |
| 2007 Q1 | 105 | 118 |
| 2007 Q2 | 102 | 116 |
| 2007 Q3 | 97 | 111 |
| 2007 Q4 | 93 | 107 |
| 2008 Q1 | 88 | 101 |
| 2008 Q2 | 81 | 93 |
| 2008 Q3 | 75 | 85 |
| 2008 Q4 | 73 | 83 |
| 2009 Q1 | 74 | 82 |
| 2009 Q2 | 70 | 78 |
| 2009 Q3 | 68 | 76 |
| 2009 Q4 | 67 | 77 |
| 2010 Q1 | 66 | 76 |
| 2010 Q2 | 65 | 76 |
| 2010 Q3 | 65 | 76 |
| 2010 Q4 | 64 | 75 |
| 2011 Q1 | 60 | 73 |
| 2011 Q2 | 59 | 71 |
| 2011 Q3 | 59 | 72 |
| 2011 Q4 | 59 | 72 |
| 2012 Q1 | 59 | 71 |
| 2012 Q2 | 59 | 71 |
| 2012 Q3 | 60 | 73 |
| 2012 Q4 | 62 | 74 |
| 2013 Q1 | 64 | 76 |
| 2013 Q2 | 68 | 79 |
| 2013 Q3 | 73 | 83 |
| 2013 Q4 | 75 | 86 |
| 2014 Q1 | 76 | 88 |
| 2014 Q2 | 78 | 90 |
| 2014 Q3 | 80 | 92 |
| 2014 Q4 | 81 | 93 |
| 2015 Q1 | 81 | 94 |
| 2015 Q2 | 83 | 96 |
| 2015 Q3 | 85 | 98 |
| 2015 Q4 | 86 | 100 |
| 2016 Q1 | 88 | 101 |
| 2016 Q2 | 90 | 103 |
| 2016 Q3 | 92 | 105 |
| 2016 Q4 | 93 | 106 |
| 2017 Q1 | 95 | 107 |
| 2017 Q2 | 98 | 110 |
| 2017 Q3 | 100 | 112 |
| 2017 Q4 | 102 | 113 |
| 2018 Q1 | 103 | 115 |
| 2018 Q2 | 105 | 118 |
| 2018 Q3 | 107 | 119 |
| 2018 Q4 | 106 | 119 |
| 2019 Q1 | 107 | 120 |
| 2019 Q2 | 109 | 121 |
| 2019 Q3 | 110 | 122 |
| 2019 Q4 | 111 | 123 |
| 2020 Q1 | 112 | 124 |
| 2020 Q2 | 114 | 126 |
| 2020 Q3 | 115 | 127 |
| 2020 Q4 | 119 | 130 |
| 2021 Q1 | 123 | 133 |
| 2021 Q2 | 131 | 141 |
| 2021 Q3 | 139 | 149 |
| 2021 Q4 | 144 | 155 |
| 2022 Q1 | 148 | 161 |
| 2022 Q2 | 157 | 171 |
| 2022 Q3 | 153 | 170 |
| 2022 Q4 | 146 | 165 |
| 2023 Q1 | 145 | 164 |
| 2023 Q2 | 150 | 168 |
| 2023 Q3 | 150 | 170 |
| 2023 Q4 | 150 | 170 |
| 2024 Q1 | 153 | 173 |
| 2024 Q2 | 155 | 176 |
| 2024 Q3 | 156 | 177 |
| 2024 Q4 | 155 | 178 |
| 2025 Q1 | 156 | 178 |
| 2025 Q2 | 157 | 179 |
| 2025 Q3 | 157 | 179 |
| 2025 Q4 | 157 | 180 |
| 2026 Q1 | 158 | 181 |
| 2026 Q2 | 157 | 181 |
Chart through 2026 Q2. Annual growth figures through 2025.
Five-year and ten-year growth rates were similar, at +6.4% a year over ten years and +86.0% in total, suggesting a similar pattern over both periods.
Over this history, home prices peaked in 2006, fell 46.0% to its 2011 low, and regained the 2006 level in 2020.
The strongest year was 2013 at +17.2%, and the weakest was 2008 at -19.9%.
In 2025 alone the index moved +1.3%, against +1.9% for the state.
ZIP codes in Sacramento, CA
Over the ten years to 2025, the 79 ZIP codes FHFA measures in this metro ranged from +45.8% in 95616 to +152.8% in 95815, while the metro as a whole rose 86.0%.
Fastest-rising ZIP codes
10-year change
- 95815+152.8%
- 95824+151.5%
- 95838+134.7%
- 95660+131.8%
- 95823+124.7%
Slowest-rising ZIP codes
10-year change
- 95616+45.8%
- 95618+51.3%
- 95811+54.8%
- 95709+56.9%
- 95623+58.3%
Show all 79 ZIP codesHide table
| 95815 | +9.2% | +7.5% | +9.7% | +152.8% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95824 | +6.6% | +7.6% | +9.7% | +151.5% |
| 95838 | -3.5% | +6.7% | +8.9% | +134.7% |
| 95660 | -0.8% | +6.9% | +8.8% | +131.8% |
| 95823 | +0.6% | +7.5% | +8.4% | +124.7% |
| 95605 | +2.6% | +6.3% | +8.2% | +120.6% |
| 95820 | +0.7% | +6.4% | +8.1% | +117.9% |
| 95832 | -0.6% | +6.6% | +8.1% | +117.4% |
| 95626 | +6.6% | +7.8% | +7.8% | +112.9% |
| 96145 | +6.6% | +8.8% | +7.8% | +112.0% |
| 95673 | +0.1% | +7.1% | +7.7% | +110.6% |
| 95842 | -4.4% | +5.6% | +7.5% | +106.2% |
| 95828 | -0.8% | +6.8% | +7.5% | +106.0% |
| 95827 | -0.7% | +6.4% | +7.4% | +104.3% |
| 95833 | 0.0% | +6.6% | +7.4% | +103.8% |
| 95825 | +1.3% | +6.9% | +7.3% | +102.6% |
| 95817 | -2.2% | +5.1% | +7.3% | +101.4% |
| 95822 | -0.2% | +6.5% | +7.2% | +101.0% |
| 95610 | +0.8% | +6.8% | +6.9% | +95.5% |
| 95758 | -1.8% | +6.8% | +6.9% | +94.8% |
| 95621 | 0.0% | +6.0% | +6.9% | +94.6% |
| 95841 | +0.9% | +5.6% | +6.9% | +94.5% |
| 95843 | +0.7% | +6.3% | +6.8% | +93.1% |
| 95834 | +1.4% | +6.6% | +6.8% | +92.7% |
| 95826 | -0.7% | +5.8% | +6.7% | +91.3% |
| 95829 | +2.7% | +7.1% | +6.7% | +90.5% |
| 95670 | -4.3% | +5.7% | +6.6% | +89.5% |
| 95632 | +0.4% | +6.1% | +6.6% | +89.4% |
| 95662 | +0.1% | +6.3% | +6.5% | +87.7% |
| 95624 | -0.2% | +6.8% | +6.5% | +87.5% |
| 95650 | +4.2% | +6.8% | +6.4% | +85.3% |
| 95821 | +2.8% | +6.3% | +6.3% | +84.7% |
| 96150 | -0.6% | +6.8% | +6.3% | +84.6% |
| 96140 | -9.3% | +5.4% | +6.3% | +83.5% |
| 95831 | +1.3% | +6.5% | +6.2% | +82.1% |
| 95757 | -0.8% | +6.6% | +6.1% | +80.8% |
| 95746 | +3.2% | +7.4% | +6.1% | +80.5% |
| 95695 | -0.2% | +5.8% | +6.0% | +79.4% |
| 95691 | +0.2% | +5.9% | +6.0% | +78.6% |
| 95693 | +1.9% | +6.0% | +5.9% | +78.1% |
| 95608 | +1.8% | +6.2% | +5.9% | +77.8% |
| 95663 | +8.3% | +6.4% | +5.9% | +77.2% |
| 95628 | +1.6% | +6.0% | +5.9% | +76.7% |
| 95678 | -1.5% | +5.9% | +5.8% | +76.4% |
| 95648 | +1.4% | +6.2% | +5.8% | +75.7% |
| 95742 | +1.8% | +6.2% | +5.8% | +75.7% |
| 95603 | +2.2% | +6.0% | +5.8% | +75.5% |
| 95864 | +1.8% | +6.1% | +5.8% | +75.1% |
| 95630 | +1.6% | +6.3% | +5.8% | +75.0% |
| 95658 | +4.2% | +6.4% | +5.8% | +75.0% |
| 95661 | +1.3% | +6.0% | +5.7% | +74.1% |
| 95614 | -2.2% | +5.8% | +5.7% | +73.3% |
| 95672 | +1.7% | +5.7% | +5.6% | +72.5% |
| 95835 | -2.1% | +5.3% | +5.6% | +72.2% |
| 95677 | +0.2% | +5.7% | +5.5% | +71.1% |
| 95765 | +1.0% | +5.9% | +5.4% | +69.8% |
| 95762 | +0.1% | +6.2% | +5.4% | +68.8% |
| 95776 | -1.1% | +5.5% | +5.4% | +68.8% |
| 95747 | +0.7% | +5.9% | +5.4% | +68.7% |
| 95682 | +3.1% | +5.6% | +5.3% | +67.9% |
| 95619 | -5.9% | +4.7% | +5.3% | +67.5% |
| 95602 | -0.3% | +5.0% | +5.3% | +67.0% |
| 95816 | +1.7% | +4.3% | +5.2% | +65.4% |
| 95818 | -0.5% | +4.5% | +5.2% | +65.2% |
| 95819 | +1.9% | +4.7% | +5.1% | +65.1% |
| 95684 | +0.1% | +4.7% | +5.1% | +64.6% |
| 95667 | -0.4% | +5.1% | +5.0% | +63.2% |
| 95713 | -2.2% | +4.7% | +5.0% | +62.5% |
| 95631 | +1.4% | +5.2% | +4.9% | +62.1% |
| 95633 | -1.3% | +4.2% | +4.9% | +61.1% |
| 95694 | -6.2% | +3.8% | +4.8% | +60.0% |
| 95726 | +0.2% | +4.6% | +4.8% | +59.7% |
| 95703 | +14.9% | +4.0% | +4.8% | +59.6% |
| 95722 | +1.2% | +5.0% | +4.8% | +59.4% |
| 95623 | -1.7% | +4.4% | +4.7% | +58.3% |
| 95709 | -2.4% | +4.2% | +4.6% | +56.9% |
| 95811 | -3.7% | +2.5% | +4.5% | +54.8% |
| 95618 | -3.7% | +4.7% | +4.2% | +51.3% |
| 95616 | -2.5% | +3.9% | +3.8% | +45.8% |
What a home report shows
Enter an address and you get a score out of 10 for how the home ranks on appreciation potential against comparable homes in its market, with the nearby sales behind it. Here is one saved report.
Example report · saved October 14, 2026
165 N Canal St, Apt 1205, Chicago, IL 60606
Appreciation score
4.1 / 10
Around the median
Where it ranks
Ranks above about 41% of comparable homes in Chicago, IL for appreciation potential.
Price against nearby sales
Priced below most nearby sales, at $300 per square foot across 6 comparable sales.
Year by year
Show 21 years of indexHide table
| 2005 | 100.0 | — | 100.0 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 102.6 | +2.6% | 110.2 |
| 2007 | 92.6 | -9.7% | 104.3 |
| 2008 | 74.1 | -19.9% | 83.4 |
| 2009 | 65.1 | -12.2% | 72.2 |
| 2010 | 60.4 | -7.2% | 70.0 |
| 2011 | 55.3 | -8.3% | 66.4 |
| 2012 | 55.8 | +0.8% | 66.5 |
| 2013 | 65.4 | +17.2% | 74.7 |
| 2014 | 73.6 | +12.6% | 83.6 |
| 2015 | 78.5 | +6.7% | 89.5 |
| 2016 | 84.7 | +7.8% | 95.9 |
| 2017 | 92.2 | +8.8% | 102.1 |
| 2018 | 98.3 | +6.7% | 108.8 |
| 2019 | 101.9 | +3.7% | 112.3 |
| 2020 | 107.2 | +5.2% | 117.1 |
| 2021 | 125.1 | +16.7% | 133.5 |
| 2022 | 141.0 | +12.7% | 153.8 |
| 2023 | 138.9 | -1.5% | 155.3 |
| 2024 | 144.3 | +3.9% | 162.4 |
| 2025 | 146.1 | +1.3% | 165.5 |
The 28 measured metros in California
| # | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | El Centro, CA | +7.7% | +9.9% | +7.8% |
| 2 | Santa Maria-Santa Barbara, CA | +2.9% | +9.2% | +6.5% |
| 3 | San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA | +1.9% | +9.1% | +7.3% |
| 4 | Anaheim-Santa Ana-Irvine, CA (metropolitan division) | +4.5% | +9.0% | +6.6% |
| 5 | Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA | +2.1% | +9.0% | +7.5% |
| 6 | Visalia, CA | +4.3% | +9.0% | +7.3% |
| 7 | Bakersfield-Delano, CA | +3.5% | +8.8% | +6.6% |
| 8 | Hanford-Corcoran, CA | +5.2% | +8.6% | +7.2% |
| 9 | Fresno, CA | +3.1% | +8.4% | +7.2% |
| 10 | San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, CA | +3.1% | +8.0% | +6.3% |
| 11 | Merced, CA | +1.5% | +7.9% | +7.5% |
| 12 | Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA (metropolitan division) | +2.8% | +7.5% | +6.6% |
| 13 | Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA | +3.0% | +7.5% | +5.9% |
| 14 | Modesto, CA | +1.5% | +7.1% | +7.1% |
| 15 | Stockton-Lodi, CA | +0.6% | +6.9% | +6.9% |
| 16 | Salinas, CA | -0.2% | +6.6% | +6.4% |
| 17 | Yuba City, CA | +0.9% | +6.5% | +7.2% |
| 18 | Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA | +1.3% | +6.4% | +6.4% |
| 19 | San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA | +0.7% | +6.1% | +5.1% |
| 20 | Redding, CA | +0.8% | +5.7% | +5.4% |
| 21 | Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA | +0.5% | +5.4% | +4.9% |
| 22 | Vallejo, CA | 0.0% | +5.3% | +5.9% |
| 23 | Napa, CA | +1.0% | +5.2% | +5.2% |
| 24 | Oakland-Fremont-Berkeley, CA (metropolitan division) | -0.1% | +4.7% | +5.2% |
| 25 | Chico, CA | +2.1% | +4.6% | +6.0% |
| 26 | Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA | +0.8% | +4.6% | +4.9% |
| 27 | San Rafael, CA (metropolitan division) | +0.8% | +4.5% | +3.6% |
| 28 | San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City, CA (metropolitan division) | +0.8% | +3.5% | +3.7% |
Source & method: Metro figures: FHFA quarterly all-transactions index for metropolitan statistical areas and metropolitan divisions, annualized as the mean of the four quarterly (NSA) values. State figures: FHFA quarterly all-transactions index, annualized as the mean of the four quarterly (NSA) values. The chart uses quarterly readings, with each series set to 100 in the first quarter of 2005. ZIP figures: FHFA annual five-digit ZIP index (developmental), ZIPs with sufficient transaction history. Missing years are reported as missing by FHFA and are not estimated. Each ZIP is placed in the metro that holds the county with most of its housing units. “5-yr /yr” and “10-yr /yr” are compound annual growth over the window ending 2025; all figures are nominal. Data published by the FHFA House Price Index; this edition compiled 2026-10-17. Educational data, not investment advice.
See the California row in the state rankings, the county rankings, and, for why one metro number hides so much, why two homes in the same ZIP code appreciate differently.
How does your home compare?
See how your home ranks against nearby homes. Your first analysis is free.
Look up your homeMeasured FHFA data · chart through 2026 Q2