Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Introduces Homeowners-to-Population Ratio (HPOP)

Overview

The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis introduces a new homeownership measure called the homeowners-to-population ratio (HPOP). Using this measure, the U.S. homeownership rate is 53 percent, compared with the commonly cited owner-occupancy rate of 65 percent.

How HPOP differs from owner-occupancy

HPOP measures the share of adults who own a home, while the traditional owner-occupancy rate measures the share of housing units occupied by an owner. In a hypothetical cul‑de‑sac with five housing units and 14 adults, four units have an owner resident, giving an owner‑occupancy rate of 80 percent, but only seven of the 14 adults are owners, yielding an HPOP of 50 percent.

Calculating the HPOP

HPOP is calculated by dividing the total number of adult homeowners by the total adult population (age 18 and older). Homeowners are identified as the reference person (head) of each owner‑occupied household plus any spouse or unmarried partner. The calculation uses the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) and includes adults living in group quarters such as college dorms, nursing homes, and correctional facilities.

Age-based insights

Using HPOP shows lower homeownership among young adults and a larger increase among older adults than the owner‑occupancy rate indicates. For households headed by adults under 35, the owner‑occupancy rate was 37 percent in 2024, whereas the HPOP for adults under 35 was 22 percent. The HPOP for a 25‑year‑old fell from 20 percent in 2006 to 12 percent in 2015, then rose to 14 percent in 2024. Among adults over 70, the HPOP increased by five percentage points over the past two decades, while the owner‑occupancy rate rose by only one point.

State-level variations

Every state has a lower HPOP than its owner‑occupancy rate, with the gap widening in higher‑cost states and narrowing in more affordable ones. Nationally, the owner‑occupancy rate is 65.3 percent and the HPOP is 53.1 percent, a difference of 12.2 percentage points. Hawaii shows the largest gap at 18.9 points (owner‑occupancy 61.6 %, HPOP 42.7 %). North Dakota shows the smallest gap at 3.9 points (owner‑occupancy 61.2 %, HPOP 57.3 %), which raises its homeownership ranking from 47th to 24th when using HPOP. Minnesota, South Dakota, and Montana have gaps of 8.9, 6.0, and 10.1 points respectively.

Policy implications

HPOP provides a person‑level metric better suited for analyzing multi‑generational housing, land‑use regulations, and long‑term financial outcomes for young adults. It avoids lumping all adults in a household into a single renter or owner category and captures adults who live in owner‑occupied homes but are not owners themselves (13.9 % of adults). This enables researchers to study, for example, whether young adults who remain in their parents’ homes are more or less likely to become homeowners later.

Community reaction and discussion

Commenters on Hacker News debated the merits and limits of HPOP. Some praised its focus on individuals:

"Looking at the statistics that are used to measure growth and performance at a population level are such a great window into how they themselves are opinionated stances. The two measures are both great measures of house ownership that measure different things." – @azath92

Others questioned whether the measure penalizes multi‑generational living:

"This isn’t “putting people first,” it’s baking in the cultural assumption that adults live separately from kin… I think 1, 2, and 4 should all count as “owning their home.”" – @rayiner "Perhaps this measure is useful to something but I find it directionally annoying as I don’t think “higher is better”… the metric “punishes” living with family even if that’s what you want to do." – @xyzelement

Some highlighted broader measurement concerns:

"I find it hard to trust economic narratives when so many metrics cited upon further inspection do not really measure what they are implied to measure. Or maybe we measure what is easiest to measure, not what is best." – @randusername "Another similarly flawed measure is household income… which is used frequently as a measure of socio‑economic class." – @pmnelson

A few noted the international context or policy implications:

"Looking at this, seeing that 50% are homeowners is actually astoundingly good. In a lot of countries 50% cannot afford to be homeowners." – @BeetleB "I hope this number drops below 50%. Well below 50%. Maybe then we can finally vote down the NIMBY regulations and NIMBY politicians." – @whack "Housing can not be a viable asset class, or it will continue to rise in prices. Step 1 is Land Value Taxes. Step 2 is remove/greatly reduce zoning, allow construction and streamline the process." – @ecshafer

Overall, the discussion reflected appreciation for a more nuanced view of homeownership while raising valid concerns about cultural assumptions and the interpretation of higher versus lower values.