The Affordability Gap

A home cost three anda half years' pay.

In 1997 a typical home in England cost 3.5 times typical annual earnings. In 2025 it cost 7.6 times, and more than 10 in London. Pick your region and see the gap, the rent, the years a deposit takes, and what closes it.

Figures checked 27 Sep 2026ONS, England and WalesSources

Your region
If you save 10% of your pay a year
1

See it

The gap where you live

A home against a year's pay, 2025

7.6×

A typical home against typical earnings of people who work here.

Years to save a 20% deposit

15

At your savings rate, if prices stood still.

Private rent takes

36%

Of the typical income of households renting privately, 2023-24.

England, 1997 to 2025House price to earnings, median · dashed: England
2

Understand it

Why the gap opened
● Policy, not people

House prices pulled away from pay over two decades. Planning made new supply slow and uncertain, the country built too few homes where people wanted to live, and cheap credit poured into a stock of housing that grew slowly. Social homes sold under Right to Buy were not replaced one for one, so more people compete in a private market that has not kept pace.

These were policy choices, sustained by governments of both parties since the 1990s. The ratio has eased since its 2021 peak of 9.1, as pay rose faster than prices, and it is still more than double 1997. The gap punishes anyone who does not already own. It is fixable with the lever that made it: how much we build, and where.

England, the ratio over time

  1. 19973.5 times earnings.
  2. 20077.2, before the financial crisis.
  3. 20167.7, as prices recovered.
  4. 20219.1, the peak.
  5. 20257.6, as pay outpaced prices.
3

Fix it

What closes the gap

Build to a binding target

Set a real housebuilding target and reform planning so it is met, year after year. Sustained supply is what brings prices back towards pay.

The trade-off

Existing owners accept more building nearby and slower growth in the value of their own homes.

Build social housing again

Replace the social homes sold off and never rebuilt, so lower earners are not pushed entirely into a stretched private market.

The trade-off

Large public capital up front, repaid over decades in lower housing benefit and steadier lives.

Give renters security

Longer tenancies and predictable rent rises, so the years spent saving a deposit are not also years of upheaval.

The trade-off

Tighter rules for landlords, set so they do not shrink the supply of homes to rent. Hard rent caps have done that elsewhere.

Now on SubstackPremium investigations and the briefing, direct to your inbox. Data. Not vibes.Subscribe →
Share this tool

Sources and method

The ratio compares the median house price with the median annual earnings of full-time employees who work in the area. Years to save = 20% of the ratio divided by the share of pay you save. It assumes prices and pay stand still and ignores interest, rent and tax, so it shows scale, not a forecast. Rent shares are for private renters' own incomes, which is why England's figure sits above most regions: London's high rents weigh on the average.