Welcome!
And I'm underwater on my stock portfolio and 401k. These are tough times. Briefly glancing at Zillow, I have to ask what the basis is for the analysis.What I saw looked short on details.
It's certainly ironical that the man who made his money from real estate (Sam Zell) has reduced coverage of real estate in the newspaper he now owns.
Who said there are statistics, damned statistics and lies? Harsh words, perhaps, but indicative of how statistics can be used to any purpose or in a sloppy fashion. I would point out that on April 20, 2008, the Los Angeles Times printed an article (link below) based on Dataquick Statistics, comparing 2007Q1 to 2008Q1: Laguna Beach +66%; West Hollywood +25.5%; Rancho Palos Verdes +17.6%; PV Peninsula +16.5%; Brentwood +15.7%; all relatively desirable areas. Outlying inland areas, hit with over construction and where it is not as desirable to live (for most folks), are down: Hemet -40%; Twenty-Nine Palms -43.3%; Moreno Valley -43.2%, etc. So which statistics are correct? Both? Neither? Perhaps localized statistics might produce more meaningful results? Link: http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/news/la-re-marketchart20apr20,0,1664084.story