China’s National Bureau of Statistics reported that in January 2026 the broad downtrend in housing prices across 70 major and medium cities continued, but the pace of monthly falls eased. New‑home prices in first‑tier cities slipped 0.3% month‑on‑month, the same decline as the previous month, while second‑tier cities registered a smaller 0.3% fall and third‑tier cities were down 0.4%.
The picture is more mixed on a year‑on‑year basis. New‑home prices in first‑tier cities fell 2.1% compared with January 2025, a deterioration from December, even as Shanghai diverged from the national trend with a 4.2% annual gain. Beijing, Guangzhou and Shenzhen recorded annual drops of 2.4%, 5.3% and 4.9% respectively. Second‑ and third‑tier cities saw new‑home prices down 2.9% and 3.9% year‑on‑year.
Second‑hand or resale markets remain softer than new‑builds. Month‑on‑month, first‑tier second‑hand prices fell 0.5% — an improvement on the prior month — while second‑ and third‑tier resale prices dropped 0.5% and 0.6%. On an annual basis, resale prices in first‑tier cities plunged 7.6%, with Beijing down 8.7%, Shanghai 6.8%, Guangzhou 8.3% and Shenzhen 6.5%.
The data underline a familiar dynamic: short‑term stabilization amid a deeper structural correction. The narrowing of month‑on‑month declines suggests that demand has not collapsed further and that recent, often localized policy nudges — from eased purchase conditions to financing incentives in some cities — are having some effect. Yet the sustained year‑on‑year falls, especially in second‑hand markets, point to continuing price pressure, excess inventory in many locales, and weak sentiment among existing owners.
This divergence between monthly and annual measures matters because policymakers read both. Smaller monthly drops are politically useful evidence that interventions can arrest precipitous falls, while the ongoing annual decline reminds authorities that the sector remains a drag on growth and a source of financial risk. For banks and developers, the pattern implies continued revenue stress and an extended period of balance‑sheet repair rather than a swift return to pre‑crisis margins.
City‑level differences are instructive. Shanghai’s year‑on‑year gain in new‑home prices highlights how local factors — supply constraints, stronger job markets, and targeted policy choices — can produce outperformance even as the wider market cools. By contrast, the sharper annual declines in Guangzhou and Shenzhen reflect regional corrections in prices that had been elevated in previous years.
For international observers, the significance is twofold. First, China’s property market remains a central transmission channel for domestic growth and financial stability. Second, the mixed signals — easing monthly declines alongside deeper annual falls — make it unlikely Beijing will pivot to broad, aggressive stimulus for housing; instead, expect targeted and incremental measures aimed at stabilizing markets without reigniting speculative booms.