U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Housing Characteristics: 2010

2010 Census Briefs

By

Christopher Mazur 

and

Ellen Wilson

C2010BR-07

Issued October 2011

INTRODUCTION

This report, part of a 

series that analyzes data 

from the 2010 Census, 

highlights housing in 

2010 and changes in 

housing characteristics 

between 2000 and 2010 

in the nation, regions, 

states, metropolitan areas, 

counties, and ten most 

populous cities.1

Focusing on housing characteristics is a 

basic way to understand 

housing markets and changes in 

housing throughout the nation. 

Since Census 2000, the housing 

industry has been impacted by 

various events and conditions that 

have resulted in noticeable shifts 

in housing characteristics within 

many parts of the nation. As a 

1 The Northeast region includes 

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 

Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. 

The Midwest includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 

Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, 

Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, 

and Wisconsin. The South includes Alabama, 

Arkansas, Delaware, the District of Columbia, 

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, 

Virginia, and West Virginia. The West includes 

Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, 

Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, 

Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

result, housing markets in areas across 

the nation shifted to reflect these changing conditions in the latter half of the 

decade.2 

A review of these events and circumstances, in combination with the housing 

characteristics data within this report, 

helps provide a greater understanding of housing in 2010 and the changes 

the nation has experienced in the past 

decade.

HOUSING QUESTIONS

Housing tenure identifies a basic feature 

of the housing inventory: whether a unit is 

owner occupied or renter occupied. Data 

on housing tenure have been collected in 

2 For a more in-depth discussion of this and housing issues throughout the decade, see the Joint Center 

for Housing Studies of Harvard University, The State of 

the Nation’s Housing, annual report series, 2000–2011, 

<www.jchs.harvard.edu/>.

Figure 1.

Reproduction of the Question on Housing 

Tenure From the 2010 Census 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census questionnaire.
2 U.S. Census Bureau

the census since 1890, when less 

than half of householders in the 

United States owned their homes. 

Data on vacancy status have been 

collected since 1940. Vacancy 

status and other characteristics 

of vacant units were determined 

by enumerators obtaining information from property owners 

and managers, neighbors, rental 

agents, and others. Vacant units 

were subdivided into seven housing market classifications: for rent; 

rented, not occupied; for sale only; 

sold, not occupied; for seasonal, 

recreational, or occasional use; for 

migrant workers; and other vacant.

HOUSING INVENTORY

According to the 2010 Census, 

there were 131.7 million housing 

units in the United States. Of these 

housing units, 116.7 million had 

people living in them (88.6 percent) 

on Census Day. The remaining 15.0 

million units (11.4 percent) were 

vacant. Between 2000 and 2010, 

the national housing inventory 

increased by 15.8 million units or 

13.6 percent. 

The South led all regions in 

total housing units.

Of the four census regions in 2010, 

the South had the most housing units with 50.0 million. The 

Midwest followed with 29.5 million, 

while the West had 28.6 million and 

the Northeast had 23.6 million. As 

a percentage of the entire national 

housing inventory, the South led 

the way with 37.9 percent of total 

housing units located in the region. 

The Midwest (22.4 percent) and 

the West (21.7 percent) followed 

as the next largest segments. The 

Northeast (18.0 percent) contributed the balance of the total housing inventory.

The South and 

West outpaced 

the Northeast and 

Midwest in housing 

growth.

Between 2000 and 

2010, the South 

(17.9 percent) and the 

West (17.3 percent) 

regions experienced 

higher rates of housing growth than the 

Midwest (9.3 percent) 

and the Northeast 

(6.6 percent). The 

states with the top 

ten percentage 

increases in housing units were in the 

West and South. In 

the West, these states included 

Nevada (41.9 percent), Arizona 

(29.9 percent), Utah (27.5 percent), 

Idaho (26.5 percent), and Colorado 

(22.4 percent). In the South, these 

states included Georgia (24.6 percent), Florida (23.1 percent), North 

Carolina (22.8 percent), Texas 

(22.3 percent), and South Carolina 

(21.9 percent). Among the states 

in the Midwest and Northeast, 

none had a percentage increase in 

housing inventory greater than the 

national percentage change of 13.6 

percent.

All states had increases in 

housing inventory during the 

decade.

As it did from 1990 to 2000, 

Nevada again experienced the 

largest percentage increase in 

housing units during the decade 

among all states; the number of 

units in Nevada increased from 

827,000 to 1.2 million. In terms 

of absolute gains, Texas (1.8 million), Florida (1.7 million), and 

California (1.5 million) were the 

only states with increases greater 

than 1 million housing units. All 

states had increases in housing 

inventories during the decade, 

however West Virginia had the 

lowest percentage increase at 4.4 

percent. In the Northeast, where 

the regional growth rate in housing units of 6.6 percent was well 

below the national growth rate, 

Pennsylvania (6.0 percent), New 

York (5.6 percent), and Rhode Island 

(5.4 percent) had lower percentage 

increases than both the national 

and Northeast growth rates.

VACANT UNITS

In 2010, there were 15.0 million 

vacant housing units in the nation, 

an increase of 43.8 percent from 

the 2000 vacant-housing-unit 

inventory of 10.4 million. During 

the decade, the national gross 

vacancy rate, that is the percentage of vacant housing units to 

total housing units, increased 2.4 

percentage points from 9.0 percent 

in 2000 to 11.4 percent in 2010.

Gross vacancy rates increased 

in each region during the 

decade.

With 11.4 percent of the housing 

units in the nation vacant in 2010, 

the regional gross vacancy rates 

were 10.2 percent in the West, 

10.3 percent in the Northeast, 

11.1 percent in the Midwest, and 

Figure 2.

Reproduction of the Question on 

Vacancy Status From the 2010 Census

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census enumerator 

questionnaire.

B. If vacant, ask: Which category best

describes this vacant unit as of

April 1, 2010? (Read categories.)

For rent

For sale only

Rented, not occupied

Sold, not occupied

For seasonal, recreational or

occasional use

For migrant workers

Other vacant
U.S. Census Bureau 3

Table 1.

General Housing Characteristics for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: 

2000 and 2010 

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Area

Total housing 

units in 2000

Housing units in 2010 Percent change, 2000 to 2010

All 

housing 

units

Vacant 

units

Occupied units

Total

Percent 

vacant Occupied

Percent 

owneroccupied Total Owner Renter

 United States . . . 115,904,641 131,704,730 11 .4 116,716,292 65 .1 13 .6 43 .8 10 .7 8 .8 14 .2

REGION

Northeast . . . . . . . . . . . 22,180,440 23,647,636 10 .3 21,215,415 62 .2 6 .6 28 .4 4 .6 4 .4 5 .0

Midwest . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,963,635 29,483,646 11 .1 26,215,951 69 .2 9 .3 46 .6 6 .0 4 .5 9 .6

South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,382,546 49,980,829 12 .7 43,609,929 66 .7 17 .9 45 .9 14 .7 12 .0 20 .6

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,378,020 28,592,619 10 .2 25,674,997 60 .5 17 .3 50 .9 14 .4 12 .6 17 .3

STATE

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 1,963,711 2,171,853 13 .3 1,883,791 69 .7 10 .6 27 .1 8 .4 4 .3 19 .4

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260,978 306,967 15 .9 258,058 63 .1 17 .6 24 .2 16 .5 17 .5 14 .7

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,189,189 2,844,526 16 .3 2,380,990 66 .0 29 .9 61 .0 25 .2 21 .5 33 .2

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 1,173,043 1,316,299 12 .9 1,147,084 67 .0 12 .2 29 .8 10 .0 6 .2 18 .7

California . . . . . . . . . . . 12,214,549 13,680,081 8 .1 12,577,498 55 .9 12 .0 54 .9 9 .3 7 .5 11 .8

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 1,808,037 2,212,898 10 .8 1,972,868 65 .5 22 .4 60 .2 19 .0 15 .9 25 .4

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 1,385,975 1,487,891 7 .9 1,371,087 67 .5 7 .4 38 .5 5 .3 6 .4 3 .2

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 343,072 405,885 15 .7 342,297 72 .1 18 .3 43 .4 14 .6 14 .2 15 .6

District of Columbia . . . 274,845 296,719 10 .1 266,707 42 .0 8 .0 13 .2 7 .4 10 .7 5 .1

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,302,947 8,989,580 17 .5 7,420,802 67 .4 23 .1 62 .6 17 .1 12 .5 27 .7

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,281,737 4,088,801 12 .3 3,585,584 65 .7 24 .6 82 .7 19 .3 16 .0 26 .0

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460,542 519,508 12 .4 455,338 57 .7 12 .8 12 .0 12 .9 15 .3 9 .9

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527,824 667,796 13 .2 579,408 69 .9 26 .5 51 .9 23 .4 19 .1 34 .6

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,885,615 5,296,715 8 .7 4,836,972 67 .5 8 .4 56 .5 5 .3 5 .7 4 .7

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,532,319 2,795,541 10 .5 2,502,154 69 .9 10 .4 49 .7 7 .1 4 .7 13 .0

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,232,511 1,336,417 8 .6 1,221,576 72 .1 8 .4 38 .0 6 .3 5 .9 7 .3

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,131,200 1,233,215 9 .8 1,112,096 67 .8 9 .0 29 .8 7 .1 4 .8 12 .3

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 1,750,927 1,927,164 10 .8 1,719,965 68 .7 10 .1 29 .3 8 .1 5 .0 15 .8

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 1,847,181 1,964,981 12 .0 1,728,360 67 .2 6 .4 23 .8 4 .4 3 .3 6 .6

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 651,901 721,830 22 .8 557,219 71 .3 10 .7 23 .1 7 .5 7 .1 8 .5

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 2,145,283 2,378,814 9 .3 2,156,411 67 .5 10 .9 35 .3 8 .9 8 .5 9 .6

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 2,621,989 2,808,254 9 .3 2,547,075 62 .3 7 .1 46 .4 4 .2 5 .2 2 .6

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 4,234,279 4,532,233 14 .6 3,872,508 72 .1 7 .0 47 .1 2 .3 – 8 .7

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 2,065,946 2,347,201 11 .1 2,087,227 73 .0 13 .6 52 .2 10 .1 7 .9 16 .8

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 1,161,953 1,274,719 12 .5 1,115,768 69 .6 9 .7 37 .6 6 .6 2 .7 17 .0

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,442,017 2,712,729 12 .4 2,375,611 68 .8 11 .1 36 .3 8 .2 5 .9 13 .7

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 412,633 482,825 15 .2 409,607 68 .0 17 .0 35 .7 14 .2 12 .4 18 .2

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 722,668 796,793 9 .5 721,130 67 .2 10 .3 34 .0 8 .2 7 .9 9 .0

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 827,457 1,173,814 14 .3 1,006,250 58 .8 41 .9 119 .6 34 .0 29 .4 41 .1

New Hampshire . . . . . . 547,024 614,754 15 .6 518,973 71 .0 12 .4 32 .3 9 .3 11 .4 4 .7

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 3,310,275 3,553,562 9 .5 3,214,360 65 .4 7 .3 38 .1 4 .9 4 .5 5 .6

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 780,579 901,388 12 .2 791,395 68 .5 15 .5 7 .2 16 .7 14 .3 22 .5

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 7,679,307 8,108,103 9 .7 7,317,755 53 .3 5 .6 27 .0 3 .7 4 .2 3 .1

North Carolina . . . . . . . 3,523,944 4,327,528 13 .5 3,745,155 66 .7 22 .8 48 .6 19 .6 15 .0 30 .0

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 289,677 317,498 11 .4 281,192 65 .4 9 .6 11 .6 9 .3 7 .4 13 .3

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,783,051 5,127,508 10 .2 4,603,435 67 .6 7 .2 55 .4 3 .5 1 .3 8 .7

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 1,514,400 1,664,378 12 .3 1,460,450 67 .2 9 .9 18 .5 8 .8 6 .9 12 .9

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,452,709 1,675,562 9 .3 1,518,938 62 .2 15 .3 31 .6 13 .9 10 .2 20 .5

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 5,249,750 5,567,315 9 .9 5,018,904 69 .6 6 .0 16 .0 5 .1 2 .5 11 .4

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 439,837 463,388 10 .7 413,600 60 .7 5 .4 58 .5 1 .3 2 .4 –0 .4

South Carolina . . . . . . . 1,753,670 2,137,683 15 .7 1,801,181 69 .3 21 .9 53 .1 17 .4 12 .7 29 .6

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 323,208 363,438 11 .3 322,282 68 .1 12 .4 24 .9 11 .0 10 .9 11 .3

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 2,439,443 2,812,133 11 .3 2,493,552 68 .2 15 .3 54 .2 11 .7 8 .9 18 .1

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,157,575 9,977,436 10 .6 8,922,933 63 .7 22 .3 38 .0 20 .7 20 .5 21 .0

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 768,594 979,709 10 .4 877,692 70 .4 27 .5 51 .6 25 .2 23 .2 30 .0

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 294,382 322,539 20 .5 256,442 70 .7 9 .6 23 .0 6 .6 6 .8 5 .9

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,904,192 3,364,939 9 .2 3,056,058 67 .2 15 .9 50 .7 13 .2 11 .8 16 .2

Washington . . . . . . . . . 2,451,075 2,885,677 9 .2 2,620,076 63 .9 17 .7 47 .8 15 .4 14 .1 17 .6

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 844,623 881,917 13 .4 763,831 73 .4 4 .4 9 .2 3 .7 1 .3 11 .0

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 2,321,144 2,624,358 13 .1 2,279,768 68 .1 13 .1 45 .6 9 .4 8 .8 10 .6

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 223,854 261,868 13 .4 226,879 69 .2 17 .0 15 .7 17 .2 15 .9 20 .2

Puerto Rico . . . . . . . . 1,418,476 1,636,946 15 .9 1,376,531 71 .6 15 .4 65 .7 9 .1 7 .2 14 .3

– Percentage rounds to 0 .0 Sources: U .S . Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 1 and 2010 Census Summary File 1 .
4 U.S. Census Bureau

12.7 percent in the South, the only 

region with a vacancy rate higher 

than the national rate. Between 

2000 and 2010, all four regions 

experienced percentage-point 

increases in vacancy rates, with the 

Midwest experiencing the largest 

increase at 2.8 percentage points. 

The South (2.4) and West (2.3) had 

similar percentage-point increases, 

while the Northeast had the lowest 

increase among the regions at 1.7 

percentage points. 

Most of the states with 

the highest gross vacancy 

rates also had the highest 

proportions of vacant units 

classified for seasonal, 

recreational, and occasional 

use.

Of the 50 states, nine states had 

gross vacancy rates greater than 

15.0 percent in 2010. Of these 

nine states, three were located in 

the Northeast (Maine, Vermont, 

New Hampshire), three in the 

South (Florida, South Carolina, 

Delaware), and three in the West 

(Arizona, Alaska, Montana). Though 

these states had the highest gross 

vacancy rates, it is of note that all 

but South Carolina had a higherthan-average proportion of vacant 

units classified as “Vacant—for 

seasonal, recreational, and occasional use” in 2010 (see Table 2). 

This class of units is more commonly referred to as “vacation” 

homes, but this category also 

includes units occupied on an 

occasional basis as corporate 

apartments and other temporary 

residences where all household 

members reported their residence 

was elsewhere.

On a percentage basis, Maine (16.4 

percent), Vermont (15.6 percent), 

and New Hampshire (10.4 percent), 

three northern New England states, 

topped the list of states with the 

most vacant units classified for seasonal, recreational, and occasional 

use. In terms of absolute numbers, 

Florida was the clear leader in the 

number of these homes (657,000), 

followed by California (303,000), 

New York (289,000), and Michigan 

(263,000).

All but three states experienced 

an increase in gross vacancy 

rates during the decade.

During the decade, the state 

with the largest percentage-point 

increase in gross vacancy rate was 

Nevada, which went from 9.2 in 

2000 to 14.3 in 2010. Seven other 

states also experienced increases 

of at least 3.0 percentage points. 

These states included Florida 

(4.2), Michigan (4.0), Georgia (3.9), 

Rhode Island (3.6), South Carolina 

(3.2), Ohio (3.2), and Arizona (3.1). 

Only three states, New Mexico 

(–0.9), Wyoming (–0.2), and Hawaii 

(–0.1), experienced percentagepoint decreases in gross vacancy 

rates.

Of the ten states with the largest 

percent increases in total housing 

units during the decade, Utah and 

Texas had the lowest increases 

in gross vacancy rates at 1.7 and 

1.2 percentage points, respetively. Nevada led all states with 

both the largest percent increase 

in total housing units and largest 

percentage-point increase in gross 

vacancy rate. Florida (4.2) and 

Georgia (3.9) also experienced large 

percentage-point increases in gross 

vacancy rates. The percentage-point 

increases in gross vacancy rates of 

the remaining ten states with the 

largest increases in total housing 

units were 3.2 in South Carolina, 3.1 

in Arizona, 2.6 in Colorado, 2.3 in 

North Carolina, and 2.2 in Idaho.

Increases in gross vacancy 

rates during the decade were 

experienced by counties of all 

population sizes.

Between 2000 and 2010, the 

percentage-point changes in gross 

vacancy rates of the 3,137 comparable counties and equivalent 

areas ranged from –33.7 in Loving 

County, TX, to 15.5 in White 

County, GA. Of the ten most populous counties in 2010, Maricopa 

County, AZ, had both the largest 

percentage-point increase (4.5) during the decade and highest vacancy 

rate (13.9 percent) in 2010. MiamiDade County, FL (12.3 percent), and 

Harris County, TX (10.2 percent), 

followed with the next highest 

vacancy rates, with these counties 

experiencing increases in vacancy 

rates of 3.4 and 3.1 percentage 

points since 2000, respectively. 

Table 2.

Ten States With the Highest Percentage of Seasonal, 

Recreational, or Occasional Use Homes: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see 

www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Area

Total housing units

For seasonal, 

recreational, or 

occasional use Percent

 United States . . . . . . . . . . . 131,704,730 4,649,298 3 .5

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 721,830 118,310 16 .4

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322,539 50,198 15 .6

New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614,754 63,910 10 .4

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306,967 27,901 9 .1

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405,885 35,939 8 .9

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482,825 38,510 8 .0

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,624,358 193,046 7 .4

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,989,580 657,070 7 .3

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,844,526 184,327 6 .5

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 667,796 41,660 6 .2

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.
U.S. Census Bureau

5

0 100 Miles

U.S. cha

0 200 Miles

0 100 Miles

Figure 3.Percentage-Point Differences in Gross Vacancy Rates: 2000 to 2010

(For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsamplingerror, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.
6 U.S. Census Bureau

Other counties among the ten 

most populous that experienced 

large percentage-point increases in 

vacancy rates were Cook County, 

IL (4.0), and Dallas County, TX 

(3.9). The remaining ten largest 

counties and their percentagepoint increases during the decade 

included King County, WA (3.1); 

Kings County, NY (2.9); San Diego 

County, CA (2.3); Orange County, 

CA (1.9); and Los Angeles County, 

CA (1.7). 

At least one in ten houses was 

vacant in half of the country’s 

ten largest cities in 2010.

Of the ten most populous cities 

in 2010, five had gross vacancy 

rates above 10.0 percent. Phoenix 

had the highest gross vacancy 

rate at 12.8 percent. Chicago 

(12.5 percent), Houston (12.3 

percent), Dallas (11.3 percent), 

and Philadelphia (10.5 percent) 

followed with the next highest 

proportion of vacant housing units. 

San Jose, with a vacancy rate of 4.0 

percent, had the lowest rate by far.

Even with the fifth-highest vacancy 

rate among the ten most populous cities in 2010, Philadelphia 

was the only city to experience a 

percentage-point decrease (–0.4) 

in its gross vacancy rate during 

the decade. The remaining cities 

all had increases greater than 2.0 

percentage points, with the highest 

increases experienced in Phoenix 

(6.7), Dallas (4.6), Chicago (4.6), 

and Houston (4.1). The remaining 

ten largest cities and their respective percentage-point increases in 

vacancy rates were San Diego (2.4), 

New York (2.2), San Jose (2.1), San 

Antonio (2.1), and Los Angeles 

(2.1).

The increases in the national 

homeowner and rental vacancy 

rates during the decade 

help to provide additional 

information about the nation’s 

vacant housing inventory.

To further assess vacant units and 

the impact they have on the housing inventory, both the homeowner 

vacancy rate and rental vacancy 

rate are used to provide additional 

information. The homeowner 

vacancy rate is the proportion of 

the homeowner inventory that is 

vacant “for sale.” It is computed by 

dividing the number of vacant units 

“for sale only” by the sum of the 

owner-occupied units, vacant units 

that are “for sale only,” and vacant 

units that have been sold but not 

yet occupied, and then multiplying 

by 100. The rental vacancy rate is 

the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant “for rent.” This 

rate is computed by dividing the 

number of vacant units “for rent” 

by the sum of the renter-occupied 

units, vacant units that are “for 

rent,” and vacant units that have 

been rented but not yet occupied, 

and then multiplying by 100. 

Nationally, the homeowner and 

rental vacancy rates in 2010 were 

2.4 percent and 9.2 percent, 

respectively. During the decade, the 

homeowner vacancy rate increased 

0.7 percentage points, while the 

rental vacancy rate increased 2.3 

percentage points.

Many of the states with the 

highest homeowner vacancy 

rates also had the highest 

rental vacancy rates in 2010.

The five states with the highest 

homeowner vacancy rates were 

also the only states with rates 

greater than 3.0 percent (see 

Table 3). These states were Nevada 

(5.2 percent), Arizona (3.9 percent), 

Florida (3.8 percent), Georgia (3.4 

percent), and Idaho (3.1 percent). 

Except for Idaho, these states also 

were in the top five states with 

the highest rental vacancy rates 

in 2010. However, states with the 

highest rental vacancy rates were 

led by South Carolina, which had 

a rate of 14.3 percent. Following 

South Carolina and rounding out 

the top five states with the highest 

rental vacancy rates were Florida 

(13.2 percent), Nevada (13.0 

percent), Arizona (12.9 percent), 

and Georgia (12.3 percent). Eight 

states made both the list of the 

top ten states with the highest 

homeowner vacancy rates and the 

list of the top ten states with the 

highest rental vacancy rates. These 

states included Alabama, Arizona, 

Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, 

North Carolina, and South Carolina 

Table 3.

Ten States With the Highest Homeo

Rates: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see 

www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

wner and Rental Vacancy 

State Homeowner 

vacancy rate State Rental vacancy rate

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 .2 South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . 14 .3

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 .9 Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 .2

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 .8 Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 .0

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 .4 Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 .9

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 .1 Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 .3

South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .8 Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 .1

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .8 Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 .6

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .7 Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 .5

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .7 North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . 11 .1

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .6 Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 .1

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1 .
U.S. Census Bureau 7

(see states highlighted in red in 

Figure 4).

“Other vacant” units 

comprised almost one-fourth 

of all vacant units.

Nationally, 3.7 million housing 

units were classified as “other 

vacant” in 2010, representing 24.4 

percent of all vacant units. Between 

2000 and 2010, there was a 

percentage-point increase of 2.3 for 

these types of vacant units. Among 

the 50 states, the percentages of 

units classified as “other vacant” 

ranged from 8.2 in Vermont to 39.9 

in Louisiana.

The “other vacant” category 

includes units being held off the 

market by an owner for any number of reasons, such as the possibility of repair, future occupancy by 

a caretaker or janitor, and bankowned properties not yet on the 

market for sale or rent. A large proportion of vacant units classified 

as other can also indicate difficulty 

on the part of the enumerators 

to determine the status for these 

vacant units.

OWNER/RENTER 

OCCUPANCY

In 2010, the percentage of owneroccupied housing units to all 

occupied units, also known as the 

homeownership rate, was 65.1 

percent nationally. From 2000, 

when the homeownership rate 

was 66.2 percent, to 2010, the 

homeownership rate decreased by 

1.1 percentage points. This decline 

in the national homeownership 

rate was the largest decrease since 

the change experienced between 

1930 and 1940. However, the 2010 

homeownership rate remains as the 

second-highest rate since collection 

of tenure data began in the census 

of 1890.

More than a third of the 

nation’s owners and renters 

lived in the South.

Within the regions, the homeownership rates were 60.5 percent 

in the West, 62.2 percent in the 

Northeast, 66.7 percent in the 

South, and 69.2 percent in the 

Figure 4.

State Homeowner Vacancy and Rental Vacancy Rates

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see 

www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.

Homeowner vacancy rate

Rental vacancy rate

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

States with both a homeowner vacancy 

rate and rental vacancy rate in the top ten

All other states
8 U.S. Census Bureau

Midwest. Between 2000 and 2010, 

each region experienced a decrease 

in homeownership rate. As a 

percentage of the entire national 

owner-occupied housing inventory, 

more than a third (38.3 percent) 

of all owner-occupied homes were 

located in the South. The next largest segment was in the Midwest 

(23.9 percent). The West (20.4 

percent) and Northeast (17.4 percent) contributed the balance of the 

homeowner inventory.

Among the 40.7 million renteroccupied housing units in the 

nation, about a third (35.6 percent, 

or 14.5 million) were located in the 

South and a quarter (24.9 percent, 

or 10.1 million) in the West. The 

remaining renter-occupied homes 

were about evenly distributed 

between the Midwest (19.8 percent, 

or 8.1 million) and the Northeast 

(19.7 percent, or 8.0 million).

In 2010, as in 2000, West 

Virginia and Minnesota 

maintained their positions as 

the states with the highest 

proportions of owner-occupied 

housing.

While the majority of occupied 

housing units in all 50 states were 

owner occupied, West Virginia 

and Minnesota had the highest 

homeownership rates in 2010 at 

73.4 percent and 73.0 percent, 

respectively. Following these 

two states and rounding out the 

top five states with the highest homeownership rates were 

Michigan (72.1 percent), Iowa 

(72.1 percent), and Delaware (72.1 

percent). As in 2000, New York 

ranked at the bottom with respect 

to homeownership (53.3 percent) 

in 2010.

In the District of Columbia, about 

three out of five households (58.0 

percent) were renters. Though renters outnumbered owners in 2010, 

both the number of owner-occupied 

units and the homeownership rate 

increased during the decade at 

10.7 percent and 1.3 percentage 

points, respectively. The number of 

renter-occupied units also increased 

5.1 percent, going from 147,000 in 

2000 to 155,000 in 2010.

Between 2000 and 2010, the 

largest increase in both owneroccupied and renter-occupied 

housing units among the 50 states 

was in Nevada at 29.4 percent and 

41.1 percent, respectively. Among 

renter-occupied housing units, 

Idaho (34.6 percent) and Arizona 

(33.2 percent) also experienced 

large increases. Rhode Island was 

the only state to have a decrease 

(–0.4 percent) in the number of 

renter-occupied housing units 

during the decade. 

Figure 5.

Owner-Occupied Units as a Percentage of All Occupied Housing Units: 1890 to 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see 

www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census of Population and Housing, decennial volumes, and 2010 Census Summary File 1.

62.2

69.2

66.7

60.5

37.8

30.8

33.3

39.5

1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

46.7 45.9 45.6 47.8

43.6

55.0

61.9 62.9 64.4 64.2

66.2 65.1

47.8
U.S. Census Bureau 9

Homeowners were a majority 

in nearly all counties, however 

many of these counties saw 

homeownership rates decrease 

during the decade.

In 2010, owners outnumbered 

renters in all but 47 (1.5 percent) 

of the 3,143 counties and equivalent areas. The counties with the 

highest homeownership rates 

were Keweenaw County, MI (89.8 

percent); Sumter County, FL (89.7 

percent); Alcona County, MI (89.6 

percent); Morgan County, UT (89.1 

percent); and Powhatan County, 

VA (88.5 percent). Homeownership 

was fairly uncommon among 

households in New York City, 

where three of the five counties 

had homeownership rates below 

30 percent. These counties were 

Bronx (19.3 percent), New York 

(22.8 percent), and Kings (27.7 

percent). The only other county 

with a homeownership rate below 

30 percent was the small county 

of Kalawao in Hawaii, where the 

homeownership rate was 1.4 

percent.

During the decade, 2,558 comparable counties from 2000 had 

percentage-point decreases in 

homeownership rates, thus relatively more households occupied 

rental housing units in 2010. The 

largest percentage-point increases 

in renter occupancy were in Loving 

County, TX (19.8); Manassas Park, 

VA (13.2); and Madison County, ID 

(10.9). Only 14 counties experienced an increase in homeownership rates greater than 5 percentage points. Of these 14 counties, 

Denali Borough, AK (9.8), and 

Mineral County, CO (8.8), had the 

largest percentage-point increases 

in homeownership rates.

All but one metropolitan area 

had more homeowners than 

renters in 2010.

Among the metropolitan areas 

with the ten highest homeownership rates, three were located in 

Michigan and three in Florida (see 

Table 4). The metropolitan areas 

in Michigan were Monroe (79.8 

percent), Holland-Grand Haven 

(78.2 percent), and Bay City (77.8 

percent); in Florida the areas were 

Punta Gorda (79.7 percent), Palm 

Coast (76.6 percent), and Ocala 

(76.3 percent). 

With a homeownership rate of 49.5 

percent, Manhatten, KS, home to 

Kansas State University, was the 

only metropolitan area where owners were outnumbered by renters. 

Other metropolitan areas with 

low homeownership rates were 

College Station-Bryan, TX (50.0 

percent), which is home to Texas 

A&M University; Los Angeles-Long 

Beach-Santa Ana, CA (50.4 percent); 

Salinas, CA (50.9 percent); and New 

York-Northern New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY-NJ-PA (51.1 percent).

Figure 6.

Percent Distribution of Tenure by Region: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see 

www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.

Owners

Renters

West

South

Midwest

Northeast

62.2

69.2

66.7

60.5

37.8

30.8

33.3

39.5
10 U.S. Census Bureau 0 100 Miles 

U.S. percent: 65.1 0 200 Miles 0 100 Miles 

U

Figure 7. Homeownership Rates: 2010 (For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf) Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1. 
U.S. Census Bureau 11

Table 4. 

Ten Metropolitan Areas With 

the Highest Percentage of 

Owner-Occupied Units: 2010 

(For information on confidentiality protection, 

nonsampling error, and definitions, see 

www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Metropolitan area Percent

Monroe, MI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 .8

Punta Gorda, FL . . . . . . . . . . . 79 .7

Holland-Grand Haven, MI . . . . 78 .2

Bay City, MI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 .8

Barnstable Town, MA . . . . . . . . 77 .4

Palm Coast, FL . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 .6

Rochester, MN . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 .6

Ocala, FL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 .3

Ogden-Clearfield, UT . . . . . . . . 75 .8

York-Hanover, PA . . . . . . . . . . . 75 .5

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, 2010 Census 

Summary File 1.

Renters outnumbered owners 

in many of the country’s ten 

largest cities.

In the four most populous cities in 

2010, the majority of households 

were renters (see Table 5). Sixtynine percent of households in 

New York City, 61.8 percent in Los 

Angeles, 55.1 percent in Chicago, 

and 54.6 percent in Houston 

rented their homes. Renters also 

accounted for the majority of 

households in San Diego (51.7 

percent) and Dallas (55.9 percent), 

the eighth and ninth most populous cities in 2010, respectively. 

Of the remaining ten largest cities, 

 homeownership was more common in Philadelphia, Phoenix, San 

Antonio, and San Jose.

METHODOLOGY AND 

SOURCES OF DATA

This report used decennial census 

data primarily for the years 2000 

and 2010. All derived values were 

computed using unrounded data. 

For readability, most whole numbers 

in the text are expressed in millions 

or rounded to the nearest thousand, 

and percentages are rounded to 

tenths. In the tables, whole numbers 

are unrounded, and percentages are 

rounded to the nearest tenth. In the 

maps, data are categorized based 

on unrounded data.

COMPARABILITY WITH 

DATA FROM OTHER 

SOURCES

The Census Bureau collects data on 

vacant units and homeownership 

rates from several other surveys, 

and one will find that there will be 

differences, sometimes noticeable 

differences, between the results 

provided by the 2010 Census and 

results from these other surveys. 

For example, the gross vacancy 

rate for the 2010 Census was 11.4 

percent, while the rate (based on 

an annual estimate) for the 2010 

Housing Vacancy Survey (HVS) was 

14.3 percent. However, both the 

2010 Census and the HVS show a 

similar upward trend in vacancies 

from 2000 to 2010. On the other 

hand, both the 2010 Census and 

annual estimates for the HVS for 

2010 show very similar homeowner 

vacancy rates —2.4 percent for 

the 2010 Census and 2.6 percent 

based on an annual estimate from 

the 2010 HVS. Numbers from 

these different sources may differ 

for several reasons. For example, 

the Census Bureau attempted to 

measure the occupancy status of 

units on April 1, 2010—a single 

day—for the 2010 Census. Most 

surveys that supply vacancy rates 

measure the status of sample 

units at the time the field representative conducts the interview. 

Census enumerators returned to 

units thought to be vacant over 

several months to verify the status, 

but always attempted to measure 

status as of April 1, 2010. The 

Census Bureau will be actively 

investigating these differences as 

analysts evaluate the results of the 

2010 Census, the 2010 HVS, and 

the 2010 American Community 

Survey. The Census Bureau plans to 

release the results of this research 

at the 2012 Federal Committee on 

Statistical Methodology Research 

Conference and in future informal 

working papers.

ABOUT THE 2010 CENSUS

The U.S. Constitution mandates 

that a census be taken in the 

United States every 10 years. This 

is required in order to determine 

the number of seats each state 

is to receive in the U.S. House of 

Representatives. The data collected in the census is also used to 

provide states with the small-area 

data they need to redraw state 

legislative districts, to distribute 

over $400 billion in federal program funding per year, and to help 

a variety of stakeholders in such 

tasks as planning services for their 

Table 5.

Ten Largest Cities and Percent of Re

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsam

www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

nter-O

pling er

ccu ror, andpied

d

Un efinitiits: 2010 ons, see 

City Total population

Total occupied 

housing units Percent renters

New York, NY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,175,133 3,109,784 69 .0

Los Angeles, CA . . . . . . . . . . 3,792,621 1,318,168 61 .8

Chicago, IL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,695,598 1,045,560 55 .1

Houston, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,099,451 782,643 54 .6

Philadelphia, PA . . . . . . . . . . . 1,526,006 599,736 45 .9

Phoenix, AZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,445,632 514,806 42 .4

San Antonio, TX . . . . . . . . . . . 1,327,407 479,642 43 .5

San Diego, CA . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,307,402 483,092 51 .7

Dallas, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,197,816 458,057 55 .9

San Jose, CA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945,942 301,366 41 .5

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1 .
12 U.S. Census Bureau

communities or researching the 

diversity of their neighborhoods. 

The Census Bureau collects data 

on housing characteristics to support and provide information on 

a variety of housing programs for 

multiple levels of government. 

Data on vacant units are needed 

by federal and local agencies to 

evaluate the overall state of housing markets, while homeownership 

rates have served as an indicator of 

the health of the nation’s economy 

for decades. 

FOR MORE INFORMATION

For more information on housing 

in the United States, visit the U.S. 

Census Bureau’s Internet site at 

<www.census.gov/hhes/www 

/housing.html>.

2010 Census housing data for state 

and local areas are available on the 

Internet at <factfinder2.census 

.gov> and on DVD. Information on 

confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions is 

available on the Census Bureau’s 

Internet site at <www.census.gov 

/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1>.

Information on other population 

and housing topics is presented 

in the 2010 Census Briefs series, 

located on the U.S. Census Bureau’s 

Web site at <www.census.gov 

/prod/cen2010/>. This series 

presents information about 

race, Hispanic origin, age, sex, 

household type, housing tenure, 

and people who reside in group 

quarters.

If you have questions or need 

additional information, please call 

the Customer Services Center at 

1-800-923-8282. You can also visit 

the Census Bureau’s Question and 

Answer Center at <ask.census.gov> 

to submit your questions online.