I see pieces like this all the time, and yet all the houses in my neighborhood are still steadily climbing. I think what we're seeing in houses is what we're seeing in the rest of society: a bifurcation in the haves and have-nots, with a decimation of the mean. What I mean by that is, the rich neighborhoods with good school districts, amenities, proximity to historic landmarks, proximity to economic activity, etc. will continue to rise in price, while neighborhoods that have none of those things will continue to go to zero. One of the most nonsensical things to happen in the past few decades was the continued markup of homes in neighborhoods and towns where there should have been no markup (read: <third-tier cities and various suburbs across the USA). So, I sincerely welcome corrections like this, but I worry that the losses will be felt in parts of the market where there were relatively fewer buyers, while the parts of the market where there is outsized demand we won't see a correction in prices. Which makes sense, I guess, I mean supply and demand dictate prices and if demand is sky high while supply is basically constant, then why would prices go down? All this to say: just because you "feel" like prices should go down doesn't mean they will. A catalyst needs to drive prices, whether that be more housing units (unlikely), boomers vacating their properties and listing on the open market at fair prices (unlikelier), or a different catalyst I am not mentioning.