Meet Them Where They Are: National Demand Landscape Survey

In a recent focus group conducted by RCKRBX, an innovative SaaS platform designed for the multifamily real estate sector, for the Real Estate Technology and Transformation Center (RETTC), a renter respondent suggested that multifamily owners and operators need to “meet them where they are.”

While this renter was referring to their “ideal property,” newly released national renter polling data shows the sentiment applies far more broadly.

In polling tens-of-thousands of prospective renters since the COVID-19 pandemic, we’ve tracked how their preferences, priorities, attitudes and viewpoints have evolved, often making it more difficult for the average property to meet future residents “where they are” (or perhaps want to be).

For years, supply has been driving demand, as opposed to the other way around, meaning that renters, across all demographic strata are pushed outside of their comfort zones to settle for units that are “less than ideal” relative to their live-space wants, needs, and expectations—or, worse, leasing apartments that don’t meet their actual living requirements.

At the same time, developers, owners, and operators, who remain uninformed or underinformed about their current and future end-users, what matters most to them, and how much they will pay for the places and spaces they want, are increasingly leaving programmatic drivers of demand, premiums, and loyalty on the proverbial table.

The RCKRBX National Demand Landscape Survey (fielded between August–September 2025 included N=2,342 randomly recruited renter respondents with a statistical margin of error +/- 2.2%) demonstrates the risks in “staying this course” as well as some promising, near-term opportunities for those who approach the multifamily market differently.

IN TODAY’S ENVIRONMENT, DENSITY DOES NOT EQUAL DOLLARS

From a macro-economic standpoint, our study sample showed that four in ten renters say the economy is heading down the wrong track—increasing since then in internal polling as high as 60% (nearly matching today’s political polls).

Less optimism around the economy in turn drives a “renters by necessity” attitude versus “renters by choice.” Only 24% indicated they “rent because I like to and prefer it over owning a home,” compared to 41% who are delaying a home purchase due to economic conditions and 30% who rent because of lifestyle or job requirements. Meanwhile, our data show those renting by choice are twice as likely to say they are “strongly” likely to renew than those delaying home purchases, and on average are willing to pay $100+ more per month for their “ideal” apartment homes.

As one of the world’s oldest, most successful asset classes, it is easy for the industry (and its observers) to view multifamily as a single, homogenized product type—a monolith—particularly given the backward-looking manner in which assets are evaluated. What has happened as a result? Product commoditization; price and concession-driven rental markets; misaligned supply vs. actual renter demand; and growing numbers of underperforming assets.

In reality, multifamily is anything but monolithic. It is more akin to a broad and deep spectrum of people and product with numerous and nuanced sub-spectra that are far more complex than population life-stages, comp sets and asset class/type designations suggest.

Take for example one of the most common (and efficient) product types: the one-bedroom unit. According to the National Multifamily Housing Council (NMHC) inventory data, one-bedroom units comprise 41% of national apartment supply, while our direct-to-the-end-user polling data shows future demand for those homes at just 21%.

Furthermore, among current one-bedroom renters nationwide, only 55% will remain in a one-bedroom unit upon renewal, with 43% seeking larger units and 2% downsizing. This will prove a significant occupancy and premium challenge over time, particularly in over-supplied areas, as the U.S. population continues to contract (i.e. meaning fewer new renters will enter the market) and renter demand for 1-bedroom units going forward remains significantly behind existing supply levels.  

Moreover, renters currently in 1-bedroom units (or those who say they’ll be in one in their next move) are 8-10 points lower on “likely” to renew their lease than two-bedroom units, and 8-10 points higher in their decisive “unlikely to renew” scores. One-bedroom renters are also more “wrong track” on the economy than any other layout tested, and the least optimistic (49% wrong track, 31% right direction).

Given the macro-economic flux and lack of unit fitness to renter need, it’s no surprise that our nationwide sample demonstrates greater favorability for non-apartment rental homes. Where 47% of renters say they would consider traditional mid-rise apartment buildings and 60% garden-style apartments, two thirds (66%) would consider a townhome rental and nearly eight in ten would say the same for detached single-family home rentals. The data foreshadows an unforced error ahead—a growing adversity to density if multifamily supply doesn’t realign to demand.

As a result, today’s inventory is focused on configurations that, at best, serve a more transient and economically depressed segment and, at worst, outright encourage churn, commodity pricing, and renters looking outside of traditional multifamily products. Even if these units lease, they won’t have the stickiness to make projects as profitable as possible.

FORWARD-LOOKING RENTER DEMAND AND DEMOGRAPHICS DEFINE DESTINY

The data show softening demand for one-bedroom (and other) units as well as underlying economic impacts driving a malaise among those renter segments that doesn’t support existing supply (at least at the expected lease pace and rent premiums). At the same time, young families (move-ups with kids) and dual-income, dual-income-no-kids couples (DINKs) are growing in their composition and intensity in the market.

Pluralities of those groups favor two bedrooms or more to accommodate their children or entertain. They indicate a higher likelihood to renew their leases than any other life stage segment tested. Half of them say they plan on increasing their rent payment in their next move. In fact, they set their hypothetical rent budgets 10% higher than the survey average, 16% higher than empty nesters 55+, and 20% higher than millennial singles.

This isn’t to say unit mixes should change overnight; inertia is against the industry as single heads of household make up 61% of the renter population according to NMHC and the 2023 US Census Bureau American Community Survey.

Still, the data advantages developers, owners and operators who think outside the box. Better yet, a “new box” would mean understanding who the high-propensity renters are for a property (before buying or building), how they are different from others (as defined by demographic and psychographic characteristics), what they value and will pay premiums for, and what that means from an asset programming and performance standpoint in order to deliver the right product, to the right customer segments, at the right time, be it micro-housing or larger two-bedrooms.

Before that, it’s best to get granular and plan pilots/prototypes by region, for which RCKRBX conducts rolling surveys to support its live, demand-side data platform. For example, our polling in the Chicago suburbs suggests only 35% of move-ups and DINKs would prefer a two-bedroom home (with more of them aiming larger) as compared to the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area where 51% of them would say the same.

A developer with portfolios in both regions would benefit from optimizing mixes in DFW to stress-test, iterate, and refine programming, marketing, and message to capture this latent demand.

Within each region, there are also dramatic differences in the proportion of current two- or three-bedroom renters willing to down-size, as well as the studio and one-bedroom renters looking to upsize. This presents an opportunity for owners/operators who have a deep understanding of their end-users, portfolios and the markets surrounding them to seize on intra-property transitions as well as new inbound leases.

DENSITY THAT “WORKS” IN A POST-COVID WORLD

Some of the richest data in the RCKRBX National Demand Landscape Survey comes from our examination of teleworking/hybrid working trends; not just that it exists, but correlated with the extent to which it impacts the resident experience, building/product preferences and rent premiums.

Among current and prospective renters nationally, 46% are hybrid or working fully remote, which includes 25% remote working one or two days per week, 8% at three or four days, and 13% full-time remote.

Hybrid workers are less likely to renew their leases (e.g., 34% “likely” to renew for hybrid workers 3-4 days off-site vs. 44% for 100%-in-office, and 46% for full-remote workers). However, hybrid workers are also paying the highest rent premiums for their desired configurations. The National Demand Landscape survey demonstrates that the “next move” rent budget for a one- or two-day off-site hybrid worker is $2,820/month compared to $2,393 for a full-time in office worker and $2,254 for a full remote worker.

These one- to two-day off-site hybrid workers are the segment most likely to prefer a one-bedroom-plus-den unit configuration, but as past RCKRBX studies have identified, they need useable dens or second bedrooms that can be comfortable, professional office settings. For many, this includes a den on the window line, sized appropriately, or buildings with suitable co-working amenities.

As a result, among the entire national audience home office amenities as a category tie concierge and property management services. They rank well ahead of gaming amenities (club rooms, game rooms) and arts and media amenities (TV rooms, movie rooms, lounges).

Among the one- to two-day off-site hybrid workers, home office amenities climb in importance, though the #1 performing amenity overall is an on-site wellness spa with steam rooms, yoga studios, and so forth, then followed by full co-working space with reservable small offices, hoteling desks, and conference rooms. Capturing this renewal-elusive, high-premium paying renter still involves a recognition that their apartment community is as much a well-space as it is a workspace.

DEFINING A NEW BOX

This is just a small slice of RCKRBX findings that are continuously updated at a market and regional level and supplemented by our national studies. Our surveys also explore the impacts of interior finishes and features, neighborhood/locational amenities, CX Tech (customer experience tech) and digitalization of the resident experience, as well as the marketing channels and messaging that resonate with these high-propensity renter targets.

The findings support “anec-data” and, sometimes, hard learned truths that multifamily developers need to revisit their alignment with an evolving end-user. More importantly, it reveals a clear case for premium and profit for those who don’t just think outside the box—but perhaps define a new one. In asking renters their future rent budget (based on validated household income) and then asking them to “design” their ideal unit, such end-user, leading-indicator data can help developers, owners and operators harness and grow new demand, not just fit diminishing demand into constrained supply.

ISSUE #20:

ASSOCIATE SPONSOR

+ EDITOR’S NOTE

+ ALL ARTICLES

+ ARCHIVE

+ LEADERSHIP

+ POLICIES

+ GUIDELINES

+ CONTACT

+ MEDIA KIT (PDF)

CONTENTS

Note from the Editor: Issue #20

Benjamin van Loon | AFIRE

AFIRE Investor Survey: The Case for US Real Estate in 2026

Benjamin van Loon | AFIRE

The Data Center Pipeline: Is it a Boom, or a Bubble?

Scot Bommarito, William Maher, Andrew Janko, Amber Hughes | RCLCO Fund Advisors

Autonomous Intelligence and the Global CIO: Formalizing Conviction in a Fragmented Market

Francis Huang | Apers AI

A Home Genome Project: How a City Learning Cohort Can Create AI Systems for Optimizing Housing Supply

Brookings

How C-PACE (and Stretch PACE) are Rewiring Global Real Estate Finance for the Energy Transition

Jonathan Seabolt | Clearwater PACE

Solar Wave: Community Solar is Set to Transform Lease Income

Michael Sanduski | Lumen Energy

Trade Winds Redraw: US Tariffs and Commercial Real Estate

Stewart Rubin and Marshall Swett | New York Life Real Estate Investors

The Complexity Premium: Leveraging the Alpha Opportunity in Regulated Gateway Cities

Donal Warde | Consultant + Richard Cadena | Bank Hapoalim (BHI) + Wenpeng Ding | Zicklin School of Business

NYC Office Recovery: Repricing Physical Infrastructure in the Age of AI

Scott Crowe | RXR

Beyond Motivation: Why Invest in US Affordable Housing? And Why Now?

Deborah La Franchi | SDS Capital Group

Build-to-Rent: Redefining Housing for Renters and Investors

Paul Kolevsohn, Alex Lachman, Lev Kling-Bronstein | Stockbridge + Don Walker, Kevin Cody | John Burns Real Estate Consulting

Inflation Fighters: The Case for Mission-Critical NNN

EJ Wislar | PRP Real Assets

Private Apartment Equity or Private Debt: Comparing Investment Performance of the Two Quadrants

Gleb Nechayev | Berkshire Residential Investments

Meet Them Where They Are: National Demand Landscape Survey

Kevin Hudak and Michael Broder | RCKRBX

REIT Puts and Calls: Public Market Signals for Private Real Estate Investors

William Pattison, Michael Steinberg, Carsten Raaum, Kiel Deitrich, Jacob Kurosaki | MetLife Investment Management

Modernizing Management: How Structural Shifts in Real Estate are Rebalancing the GP and LP Relationship

Finn DuComb-Festor and Miles Treaster | Cushman & Wakefield

Clarifying Vision: Exploring the Dynamics of Slowing Capital Flows

Cliff Booth | Westmount Realty Capital

DISCLAIMER

The publisher of Summit is not engaged in providing tax, accounting, or legal advice through this publication. No content published in Summit is to be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any asset. Some information included in Summit has been obtained from third-party sources considered to be reliable, though the publisher is not responsible for guaranteeing the accuracy of third-party information. The opinions expressed in Summit are those of its respective contributors and sources and do not necessarily reflect those of the publisher.

A