A view of an apartment complex in Apgujeong-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul. Yonhap News
To rank among the top 1% by price of apartments traded in Seoul in the first half of this year, at least about 4.65 billion won was required. With the threshold rising by nearly 350 million won from the second half of last year, Seoul’s high-priced apartment market appears to be regaining strength.
According to an analysis of nationwide apartment sales transaction data by Zigbang on the 20th, the threshold for the top 1% of Seoul apartment transaction prices in the first half of this year was 4.64998 billion won. While this falls short of the 4.98 billion won recorded in the first half of last year, it is higher than the 4.3 billion won recorded in the second half of last year, when the “triple regulation” was expanded across all of Seoul.
The average transaction price of top 1% apartments also rose from the second half of last year. The average sale price in the first half of this year was 6.3059 billion won. This was lower than the 6.88334 billion won in the first half of last year, but exceeded the 5.96843 billion won recorded in the second half of last year.
In Seoul, riverside complexes in both Gangnam and Gangbuk, along with reconstruction apartments and new luxury residential complexes, accounted for a significant portion of top 1% transactions, the analysis found. In Gyeonggi Province, the top 1% threshold price was 1.85 billion won, with an average transaction price of 2.23468 billion won. Apartments mainly included those in areas with excellent access to Seoul or their own business and living infrastructure, such as Gwacheon, Bundang and Pangyo in Seongnam, Gwanggyo, and Dongtan.
In regional areas, the top 1% price ranges in Daegu and Busan were relatively high. Daegu’s threshold was 1.58 billion won, with an average transaction price of 1.90475 billion won. Busan recorded a threshold price of 1.525 billion won and an average transaction price of 2.1896 billion won.
Kim Eun-sun, head of Zigbang’s Big Data Lab, noted, “In the metropolitan area, top 1% complexes are formed in diverse and wide-ranging ways within regions, whereas in regional areas, top 1% transactions tend to center on specific landmark complexes that represent the region.” She added, “There are also differences in how the top-tier markets are formed depending on regional market size and the supply conditions for high-priced housing.”