If you want to understand where Ontario’s housing market is really headed, stop watching prices and start watching cranes.

Because right now, residential construction in the GTA isn’t slowing. It’s collapsing.

The numbers are stark. Toronto housing starts are down 58 per cent. GTHA single-family sales have fallen 71 per cent. In some condo segments, sales are down as much as 90 per cent. According to the Building Industry and Land Development Association, 2025 is shaping up to be the worst year for new home sales in the GTA in 45 years.

This isn’t noise. It’s structural.

Developers aren’t pulling back because demand disappeared. They’re pulling back because projects no longer pencil. Higher financing costs, construction inflation, policy uncertainty, and a presale-dependent condo model that no longer works have converged at the same time. When risk rises faster than returns, capital freezes. And when capital freezes, supply disappears.

That’s the part too many people miss.

Today’s slowdown in construction doesn’t show up immediately as a crisis. In the short term, buyers feel relief. More negotiating power. Softer sentiment. Fewer bidding wars. But housing markets don’t respond in real time. They lag.

What’s being cancelled or delayed in 2025 is the supply that was supposed to arrive in 2027, 2028, and beyond.

And once that pipeline breaks, it doesn’t restart quickly.

This is why construction data matters more than monthly sales stats. You can’t fix a future supply shortage after the fact. You either build ahead of demand—or you pay for it later through higher rents, tighter inventories, and renewed affordability pressure.

For buyers, this environment rewards patience and foresight.
For sellers, it reinforces the importance of timing and positioning.
For investors, it’s a reminder that scarcity is often born during periods of pessimism, not optimism.

Ontario’s housing problem isn’t just about prices being too high or demand being too strong.

It’s about supply quietly disappearing while everyone’s watching the wrong indicators.

By the time the impact feels obvious, it will already be too late to change it.

At first glance, it looks harmless. Helpful, even.

Royal Bank of Canada partnering with REALTOR.ca to embed financial guidance directly into the home search experience feels like a natural evolution. Mortgage insights inside listings. Affordability tools are layered into browsing. AI-driven prompts nudging buyers toward “what they can afford.”

On paper, it’s clean. Efficient. Logical.

But beneath the surface, this isn’t just a feature rollout. It’s a structural shift.

For consumers, the upside is obvious. Less friction between dreaming and qualifying. More clarity earlier in the process. Fewer surprises when numbers finally enter the conversation. In a market where affordability anxiety is real, guidance at the point of search feels empowering.

But real estate systems don’t change without consequences.

For agents, this move signals something larger: vertical integration is accelerating. The search portal and the lender are no longer adjacent. They’re converging. The moment a buyer clicks a listing, the financing conversation is already being shaped by an institution with a balance sheet, proprietary data, and national reach.

That matters.

Because whoever controls the early framing of affordability controls behaviour. What buyers click. What they dismiss. How confident they feel. How fast they move. This isn’t just about convenience—it’s about influence.

For the industry, this partnership is another step toward platform consolidation. Search, data, financing, and advice are slowly being pulled into fewer ecosystems. Not because of a hostile takeover, but because integration wins on ease. And ease wins market share.

This doesn’t make agents obsolete. But it does raise the bar.

In a world where financial guidance is embedded into listings, the agent’s value shifts further toward strategy, interpretation, and local nuance. Human judgment matters more when automated tools flatten everything into numbers.

For Calgary buyers and investors, this development reinforces an important truth: the real estate journey is becoming more centralized, more data-driven, and more influenced before the first showing ever happens.

For sellers, it means your listing no longer lives in isolation. It lives inside an ecosystem that shapes buyer perception instantly.

And for professionals, it’s a reminder that real estate isn’t just about homes anymore.

It’s about who owns the rails between curiosity and commitment.

This isn’t marketing.

It’s ecosystem building.

On Pharmacy Avenue in Scarborough, the system didn’t just slow down.

It said no.

A six-storey mid-rise proposal—supported by planning staff and aligned with Toronto’s “gentle intensification” framework—was rejected over parking concerns and the ever-elastic phrase “neighbourhood character.” The project is now under appeal.

On paper, this shouldn’t have happened.

Both Pharmacy Avenue and Islington Avenue were redesignated in 2024 as major streets under Toronto’s EHON initiative, explicitly allowing small apartment buildings up to six storeys. Same policy. Same intent. Two completely different outcomes.

That inconsistency is the story.

Legacy rules—some dating back to the 1950s—are still being selectively applied, even when they directly contradict updated council policy. And that disconnect matters more now than ever.

Here’s why.

High-density towers aren’t pencil.
Mid-rise projects are stalling under financing pressure.
Small and mid-scale developers are the ones stepping in to fill the supply gap.

But they can’t carry prolonged approval risk.

When committee decisions override adopted policy, uncertainty becomes the cost of entry. Smaller builders don’t have the balance sheets to wait years in limbo. Non-traditional investors don’t price political volatility into modest rental projects. So they walk.

And that’s dangerous.

Because this type of six-storey, corridor-based rental housing is exactly what can move quickly in a frozen market. It has lower capital intensity. Faster to deliver. Less reliant on speculative presales. In other words, it’s the supply profile cities say they want.

For Calgary buyers and investors, this isn’t a Toronto problem to ignore. It’s a preview.

As Calgary advances zoning reform, missing-middle policies, and corridor density, the lesson is clear: policy alignment doesn’t eliminate execution risk. Political discretion still shapes outcomes. Context still matters. And approvals are not binary—they’re negotiated.

For sellers, that means entitlement certainty carries real value.
For buyers, it means underwriting timelines matter as much as underwriting rents.
For investors, it reinforces a hard truth: risk today lives upstream, long before construction.

Pharmacy Avenue didn’t fail because the idea was wrong.

It failed because the system couldn’t decide which rules actually mattered.

And in today’s real estate market, uncertainty isn’t neutral—it’s a deterrent.

On Islington Avenue in Etobicoke, the system worked.

A scaled six-storey multiplex proposal moved through the process.
A zoning amendment was secured.
Committee approval was granted.

On paper, this is exactly what Toronto’s “gentle intensification” policy promised: modest density along a major corridor, delivered without towers, disruption, or years of appeals. But the real value of this approval isn’t the building itself. It’s what it reveals about how real estate actually moves forward in today’s policy-heavy markets.

This project succeeded not because policy allowed it—but because politics aligned with process.

The site fit the corridor narrative. The scale matched the street. The proposal was defensible, not aggressive. Most importantly, it landed in a political environment willing to translate policy into execution. That combination is rarer than many investors assume.

For buyers and investors, this approval highlights a critical shift in real estate risk. The biggest variable is no longer zoning density on paper. It’s approval certainty. Two sites can offer identical entitlements and radically different outcomes once neighbourhood pressure, committee dynamics, and councillor discretion enter the equation.

This matters far beyond Toronto.

In Calgary, similar conversations are unfolding around missing-middle housing, rezoning, and corridor intensification. The takeaway isn’t that density is dangerous. It’s that execution risk is now a first-order consideration. Projects that align scale, context, and political tolerance move forward. Projects that push too hard stall—or die quietly.

For sellers, approvals like Islington’s show why entitled or near-entitled land carries a premium. For buyers, they reinforce the importance of understanding process, not just potential. For investors, they underline a hard truth: returns increasingly favour those who price risk correctly, not those who assume policy equals permission.

Islington Avenue didn’t win because the rules existed.

It won because the rules were allowed to work.

And in today’s real estate market, that distinction separates viable projects from expensive lessons.

On paper, Toronto’s “gentle intensification” policy makes sense.

Allow small apartment buildings along major corridors. Add density without towers. Ease housing shortages incrementally. A rational response to an irrational affordability crisis.

But real estate doesn’t live on paper. It lives on the streets.

And that’s where the theory begins to fracture.

Consider two nearly identical arterial roads. Similar traffic volumes. Comparable zoning context. The same citywide policy framework encourages mid-rise density. Two six-storey multiplex proposals move forward under the same rules.

One is approved.
The other is rejected.

Same policy. Different outcome.

That gap is where investors lose money.

Toronto’s experience reveals a truth many market participants underestimate: policy intent does not equal political reality. “As-of-right” density still collides with councillor discretion, neighbourhood opposition, committee dynamics, and appeal fatigue. The result is a planning environment where risk is not eliminated—it’s redistributed.

For developers, that means feasibility is no longer just about land value, construction costs, and rents. It’s about process risk. Timeline risk. Carrying-cost risk. Reputation risk. Two sites that look identical in an Excel model can diverge dramatically once politics enters the equation.

For investors outside Toronto—including those active in Calgary—this matters more than it seems.

Calgary is actively pursuing its own version of gentle density through rezoning and missing-middle policies. The lesson from Toronto isn’t “density doesn’t work.” It’s that implementation matters more than intention. Markets that align political will, administrative clarity, and community buy-in reduce friction. Markets that don’t create invisible costs.

For buyers and sellers, these frictions shape supply in ways headlines rarely capture. Approved projects move forward slowly. Rejected projects disappear quietly. And the resulting shortage gets blamed on “the market,” not the process.

Real estate cycles aren’t just economic. They’re institutional.

Gentle intensification, when filtered through political reality, stops being gentle. It becomes selective. And for investors, selectivity is everything.

Because in this market, the biggest risk isn’t density.

It’s assuming policy guarantees execution.

Real estate regulation rarely makes headlines—until something breaks. And right now, something fundamental has cracked.

The Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO) has suspended four Save Max brokerages and frozen their trust accounts after uncovering $2.7 million unlawfully disbursed from client trust funds. That money, according to reports, was used for loan payments, property management fees, taxes, credit card balances, and vendor services—expenses that are explicitly prohibited under trust account rules.

This isn’t a grey area. It’s a hard line.

What makes this moment especially significant is context. Less than a year ago, Ontario saw the largest trust breach in its history, when $10.5 million went missing at iPro Realty. That scandal exposed slow enforcement, procedural drift, and regulatory hesitation. This time was different.

RECO acted fast.

Brokerages were suspended immediately.
Trust accounts were frozen.
Registration revocations were proposed without delay.

The timing isn’t accidental. These actions come shortly after the Ontario government stepped in to restructure real estate oversight, signalling a shift from passive supervision to active enforcement. The message is clear: trust accounts are not operating capital. They are not float. They are not discretionary.

They are sacrosanct.

For buyers and sellers, this moment reinforces why brokerage structure, compliance culture, and internal controls matter just as much as marketing or sales volume. Trust accounts are the backbone of transactional confidence. When they’re abused, the risk isn’t theoretical—it’s personal.

For investors, especially those operating across provinces, this marks a regulatory inflection point. Enforcement risk is rising. Tolerance for “creative accounting” is disappearing. Brokerages that treated trust rules as flexible are being forced out of the system.

And while this incident is rooted in Ontario, the implications travel. Regulators across Canada are watching. Consumers are paying attention. And confidence—once shaken—is slow to return.

Real estate is built on leverage, timing, and trust. When trust breaks, leverage collapses.

This isn’t just a scandal. It’s a line in the sand.

On the surface, 2025 looked like a year of cooling energy markets. Dig a little deeper, and the picture becomes far more complex—and far more instructive for anyone watching Calgary real estate.

Oil prices declined through much of 2025, not because demand collapsed, but because global production rose faster than consumption. Inventories built. Supply outpaced urgency. Brent crude has averaged close to US$60 per barrel in recent months, even after a modest uptick tied to geopolitical tensions. That level sits below the US$65 assumption used in earlier forecasts, and it matters for Alberta.

Lower oil prices tend to cool near-term energy investment, and that restraint is already showing up. While Alberta remains one of Canada’s growth leaders, the next leg of energy-driven capital spending is unlikely to arrive in 2026, especially in a weaker pricing environment. For real estate, this signals moderation—not retreat.

But energy isn’t the whole story.

Natural gas prices have surged, driven by unusually high heating demand. That divergence matters. Alberta’s energy economy isn’t monolithic, and gas strength continues to support infrastructure, employment, and investment in ways oil alone does not capture.

Beyond energy, commodity markets are quietly tightening.

The Bank of Canada’s non-energy commodity price index has risen since October, supported by higher base-metal prices amid constrained supply. Gold and silver have also climbed, reflecting persistent geopolitical uncertainty and investors seeking protection rather than growth. Even cattle prices remain elevated, feeding directly into higher food costs and inflation sensitivity across households.

This mix tells us something important.

Alberta’s economy is no longer riding a single commodity wave. It’s increasingly diversified across energy, metals, agriculture, and industrial inputs, each responding to different global pressures. That diversification adds resilience—but it also removes the explosive upside that once came from oil alone.

For Calgary real estate buyers and investors, this environment rewards precision over prediction. Broad booms are unlikely. So are sharp busts. Instead, capital will flow selectively—toward assets aligned with infrastructure, logistics, food processing, petrochemicals, and industries tied to long-term demand rather than short-term price spikes.

In markets like this, the signal isn’t in the headline price of oil.

It’s in the cross-currents of commodities, costs, and capital, and how they quietly shape employment, migration, and housing demand.

That’s where real estate decisions are made now—not in extremes, but in structure.

One Storey or Two? What Calgary’s Housing Data Reveals Beneath the Debate

Few questions come up as often in Calgary real estate conversations as this one: Is a one-storey home actually more valuable than a multi-storey home? The answer, like most things in real estate, isn’t emotional. It’s structural, historical, and deeply local.

Start with the supply.

One-storey detached homes now represent a smaller share of overall inventory in the Calgary market. That’s not accidental. Construction trends have shifted decisively toward multi-storey builds, while redevelopment has steadily replaced older bungalows with larger, newer homes. In 2025, one-storey properties accounted for just 27 per cent of all listings, reinforcing their growing scarcity.

Scarcity alone, however, doesn’t guarantee price growth.

In 2025, benchmark prices for one-storey homes remained largely flat, while multi-storey homes posted nearly two per cent price growth across the city. That happened even though months of supply were generally lower for one-storey homes, a detail that often surprises buyers and sellers alike.

So why didn’t a tighter supply translate into stronger price appreciation?

The answer lies in vintage and scale. Across most districts, multi-storey homes tend to be newer, larger, and more aligned with modern buyer preferences. That combination matters. In fact, price growth for multi-storey homes outperformed one-storey homes in every district except the North East and North, where different affordability and buyer dynamics are at play.

This doesn’t mean bungalows are underperforming everywhere.

When you isolate communities where one-storey and multi-storey homes share similar build dates, the story becomes far more nuanced. In those cases, the results are mixed, with roughly half of the communities showing stronger price growth for one-storey homes, and half favouring multi-storey properties.

That tells us something important.

The market isn’t rewarding height. It’s a rewarding function, condition, and context.

In older inner-city or mature suburban neighbourhoods, one-storey homes can command strong interest when they offer comparable size, updates, and lot value. In newer areas, multi-storey homes benefit from layout efficiency, square footage, and buyer expectations that have evolved alongside construction norms.

For buyers, this means the decision shouldn’t be framed as one-storey versus two-storey. It should be framed as this home versus its true competition.
For sellers, it reinforces that pricing must reflect not just scarcity, but age, usability, and buyer demand within your specific community.
For investors, it’s a reminder that headline trends don’t replace street-level analysis.

In Calgary’s housing market, value isn’t built vertically or horizontally.

It’s built where supply history, buyer preference, and neighbourhood context intersect.

In every housing cycle, there are segments that dominate the headlines—and others that quietly do exactly what they’re supposed to do.

In Calgary’s resale market, semi-detached homes sit firmly in the second category.

Representing just nine per cent of total inventory and sales, semi-detached properties are the smallest slice of the city’s resale market. They’ve also become a rarer product over time. Compared to row and apartment-style housing, semis account for a much smaller share of new construction, a trend that has persisted for more than a decade.

That structural constraint matters.

While new construction starts did improve this past year, growth was overwhelmingly concentrated in higher-density housing. Row homes and apartments surged ahead, while semi-detached construction lagged. As a result, semi-detached resale inventories avoided the near-record and record-high levels seen in other attached segments.

That doesn’t mean supply hasn’t increased.

Rising new listings combined with slightly slower sales pushed inventories higher through the second half of the year, bringing conditions back toward long-term historical norms. By the final four months, the semi-detached market had largely settled into balanced territory—a notable shift from the tight conditions that defined the spring.

Prices told a similar story.

Seasonal softening appeared later in the year, but on an annual basis, benchmark prices rose by nearly three per cent, exactly in line with expectations for this segment. That stability reflects a market that is neither overheated nor distressed—one supported by limited supply but no longer driven by urgency.

However, this is not a uniform market.

Nearly 30 per cent of semi-detached supply is concentrated in the City Centre, where price range matters enormously. Units priced above $1,000,000 are experiencing higher supply-to-demand ratios, while lower-priced semis continue to favour sellers. These dynamics are creating pockets of price reductions alongside areas still reporting modest growth.

Looking ahead to 2026, the picture becomes clearer.

Increased supply and choice in competing row homes—both new and resale—are expected to slow semi-detached sales further, pulling activity back in line with long-term trends. At the same time, that competition is likely to cap price growth, preventing any significant upward or downward swings.

For buyers, this means opportunity through selectivity.
For sellers, success will depend on pricing precision and positioning.
For investors, semi-detached homes remain a fundamentally constrained asset—but one that now requires a sharper understanding of location and price band.

In Calgary’s evolving housing market, semi-detached homes aren’t driving the cycle.

They’re revealing it.

And knowing how to read that signal is where real leverage begins.

For several years, apartment-style condos were one of Calgary’s strongest performers. Limited supply, tight rental markets, and rapidly rising rents pushed many buyers into ownership between 2022 and most of 2024. Condos became the pressure valve for a market short on options.

But markets evolve, and by the end of 2024, the tone began to change.

Record-high construction levels over the past several years significantly increased both rental and new condo supply. As more purpose-built rentals came online and rental rates began to ease, fewer renters felt the urgency to transition into ownership. At the same time, new home construction pulled demand away from resale apartments and toward brand-new products.

By 2025, the impact was clear. Resale apartment sales totalled 5,426, down 29 percent from the elevated levels of 2024. While this activity remained stronger than anything seen before 2022, momentum slowed as new listings stayed high and inventory climbed to record levels.

With rising supply across resale, rental, and new construction, prices came under pressure. By the end of 2025, apartment-style condo prices were eight percent below their 2024 peak, and on an annual basis, prices declined by nearly three percent compared to 2024. The largest drops occurred in the North East, North, South East, and East districts. In contrast, the City Centre, home to 43 percent of all apartment inventory, proved more resilient, with prices down just two percent year over year.

Looking ahead to 2026, rental vacancies are expected to remain elevated, and additional new construction completions will continue adding supply. This excess inventory is likely to persist, placing further downward pressure on apartment-style condo prices.

For buyers, this cycle creates opportunity, especially for those focused on long-term value and location. For sellers, pricing and strategy will matter more than timing alone. For investors, the path forward requires precision, not optimism.

Calgary’s apartment market isn’t broken. It’s recalibrating. And in moments like this, informed decisions, not hesitation, are what separate missed chances from smart moves.

For the past few years, Calgary’s rental market felt unstoppable. Tight vacancies. Rapid rent growth. Purpose-built rental projects launching at record speed. It all made sense at the time.

International migration surged, vacancies dropped, and rental rates climbed fast. Builders responded the only way markets know how, by building. Purpose-built rental construction accelerated, reaching historic highs as developers raced to meet demand.

But markets don’t move in straight lines.

As we look ahead to 2026, the backdrop is changing. International migration into Calgary is slowing, with forecasts showing 8,032 international migrants in 2026. That pullback is happening just as a wave of new rental supply is arriving. Units that were planned, financed, and built during peak demand are now coming online in a very different environment.

The result? Rising vacancy rates and downward pressure on asking rents.

There are still over 11,801 purpose-built rental units under construction across the city, scheduled to be completed over the next several years. With lower migration levels expected to persist, it will take longer for this added supply to be absorbed. That imbalance is likely to keep vacancy rates elevated throughout 2026 and weigh further on rental pricing.

For renters, this shift creates choice and negotiating power. For investors, it demands precision. Not all rental assets will perform the same way. Product type, location, tenant profile, and long-term holding strategy matter more now than they have in years.

For buyers and sellers watching from the sidelines, this is a reminder that Calgary’s real estate market is entering a more nuanced phase. The easy wins are gone. The smart moves remain.

The opportunities in 2026 won’t come from following last year’s headlines. They’ll come from understanding supply cycles, migration trends, and where pressure is building, or releasing, across the city.

If you’re considering buying, selling, or investing in Calgary real estate and aren’t sure what to do next, this is exactly the kind of market where informed strategy separates hesitation from confidence.