Upgrade or wait in 2026? Key decisions for upgrading your property assets

Global change reinforces Singapore’s role in wealth and asset allocation.

AI, US–China competition and inflation are the three themes I use to understand the macro environment. For homebuyers, their effects ultimately pass through employment, wealth accumulation and the cost of the next development cycle.

AI investment creates new sources of growth and wealth.

AI drives investment in computing, infrastructure and industrial upgrading. In my view, Singapore’s international connectivity, professional services and talent advantages position it to participate in this investment cycle, supporting housing purchasing power through business growth, employment and incomes. [1]

De-risking prompts capital and talent to reconsider where they locate.

I view US–China competition as a long-term contest in technology and industry. Companies are reorganising headquarters, research, supply chains and capital. In my view, Singapore’s stable institutions and global connections make it an important long-term destination for capital and talent, also supporting local housing demand.

Inflation and development costs change the pricing base for new homes.

Land, materials and labour determine the starting cost of future supply. In assessing residential value, I consider how these costs may reshape subsequent launch prices. Buyers should assess their own holding capacity against actual mortgage quotations and household income.

Source: IMF October 2026 WEO, using information available up to 1 October 2026. These global indicators are not forecasts of Singapore’s growth, inflation or housing prices. [1]

Local context: the MAS statement of 14 October 2026 forecasts core inflation of 1.5%–2.0% and headline CPI of around 2.0% for 2026. Singapore’s monetary policy is centred on the exchange rate. These are forecasts and policy context. [2]

Share in Singapore’s growth to understand the long-term value of housing.

To understand home prices, I start with Singapore’s long-term capacity to create wealth. Economic development, accumulated wealth and housing purchasing power form the foundation of my assessment of long-term residential value.

DATA 01 · Presentation slide 18

Economic growth and home prices: a shared long-term direction

Over the long term, Singapore’s economic development and rising home prices have followed a broadly similar direction. Growth supports incomes, wealth and purchasing power, with higher residential values forming part of that process. My view is that Singapore’s long-term wealth-creation capacity and residential value are positively related over time.

For buyers, growth in long-term purchasing power is an important foundation for assessing residential asset value.

DATA 02 · Presentation slide 19

Continuing wealth growth provides long-term support for housing

Equities and property are both vehicles for wealth growth. Their short-term performance varies: equities lead in some periods, while property is stronger in others. Over a longer horizon, both reflect Singapore’s economic development and wealth accumulation. My focus is the long-term support that sustained wealth growth can provide to housing.

In my view, accumulated wealth supports families’ housing improvements and residential asset allocation. The assets have different cycles; this view does not require equal returns or converging prices.

Population-driven demand continues to grow; new supply determines market tightness.

DATA 03 · Presentation slide 16

Citizenship, permanent residence and population policy support long-term housing demand

Singapore continues to welcome new citizens and permanent residents, with population policy supporting long-term housing demand. Considering the grant trends and future policy targets shown, my view is that population-driven housing demand continues to strengthen.

Historical grants describe status changes that have occurred; future targets indicate policy direction. For buyers, they suggest continuing support for long-term residential demand.

DATA 04 · Presentation slide 16

Unsold new homes: watch replenishment and the supply–demand cycle

As demand grows, the pace of new supply and completion matters. If population and household demand persistently grow faster than residential supply, the balance can tighten and put upward pressure on prices. This is an important reason for my positive view of the fundamentals.

The chart shows unsold new-home supply. My focus is whether supply can be replenished in time as demand grows, and whether buyers have sufficient choice for their preferred location, total budget and move-in date.

DATA 05 · Presentation slide 23

Private and landed homes: supply structure shapes scarcity

HDB flats dominate Singapore’s housing stock. Private apartment supply is comparatively limited, and landed homes are scarcer still. In my view, demand to upgrade into private homes and the difficulty of greatly expanding landed supply support their long-term value. Within budget, buyers should compare location, product quality and scarcity together.

Financial wealth has grown faster, leaving opportunities in relative residential value.

DATA 06 · Presentation slide 21

Around 2013: financial assets begin outpacing residential assets

The chart shows a notable shift in Singapore’s household balance sheet around 2013. Before then, financial and residential assets were closer in scale. Financial assets subsequently grew faster, reducing residential assets’ relative share of total household assets.

My interpretation is that continuing property cooling measures, which restrained capital entering real estate, are important context for this shift. Different growth rates in financial and residential assets reflect changes in wealth accumulation and property allocation.

In my view, Singapore home prices have not expanded at the same pace as household financial wealth. From this perspective, relative residential valuations remain reasonable, with potential value opportunities worth investigating.

This is my investment interpretation of changes in the asset mix. Assessing a specific home still requires its actual entry price, comparable transactions and product scarcity; an aggregate asset chart cannot independently prove undervaluation.

Today’s land costs are reshaping tomorrow’s new-home pricing benchmarks.

Land is a core development cost. What developers pay for land today provides an important reference for future project costs and positioning. Higher land prices mean the next round of supply starts from a higher cost base.

In my view, rising land costs put upward pressure on future launch prices. Today’s land transactions are therefore an important clue to future pricing benchmarks.

DATA 07 · Presentation slide 22

Land costs across locations outline the new-home cost base

Cross-location comparisons suggest changes in relative cost bases. Some newer suburban sites have land costs approaching those of earlier city sites. In my view, projects acquired earlier with attractive locations and products merit closer comparison of their actual selling prices.

DATA 08 · Presentation slide 10

The recent Lentor land-cost rebound raises subsequent development costs

In the Lentor chart, the 2026 site at around S$1,278 psf ppr is approximately 38.9% above the 2025 site shown at S$920. A rebound in land costs raises the starting cost for subsequent projects. In my view, this shifts local new-home pricing benchmarks upward and makes earlier projects’ pricing worth examining.

These are different sites. The chart shows around S$1,204 psf ppr in 2021, followed by a decline. The 38.9% describes the difference between the two listed 2025 and 2026 transactions, not uninterrupted increases across all suburban sites or years.

DATA 09 · Presentation slide 30

Higher city land costs influence future pricing benchmarks

The city chart compares land acquisition costs with selling prices of launched projects. Higher recent land costs raise the development base for the next city launches. In my view, rising costs in city and some suburban sites together change the pricing reference buyers may face; the effect depends on acquisition timing and product positioning.

DATA 10 · Presentation slide 33

A nearby Upper Thomson site has land costs around 36.8% higher

Using the published psf ppr land-cost figures, the Lorong Puntong / Sin Ming Avenue site near Upper Thomson, at around S$1,612, is approximately 36.8% above Thomson Reserve’s around S$1,178.

Subsequent projects in the area therefore begin with substantially higher land costs. In my view, this can move future local launch benchmarks upward and makes Thomson Reserve’s earlier land-acquisition advantage worth examining. The ultimate question is whether that advantage is reflected in the price the buyer actually pays.

Checked on 22 October 2026: Eco World Development (S) Pte Ltd was the award recipient; S$208,099,000 was the award consideration; around S$1,612 is calculated using permitted GFA. See EcoWorld’s 18 September 2026 announcement. Thomson View’s S$810 million was the acquisition consideration; around S$1,178 includes land betterment charges for intensification and the premium to renew the lease to 99 years. See EDMUND TIE’s 25 November 2024 announcement. The published land costs provide a benchmark comparison. Thomson’s bonus floor area and final premium breakdown are not fully disclosed in that announcement. The 36.8% is neither a fully normalised, audited cost difference nor a home selling-price difference.

My pricing scenario: what would a benchmark increase of at least 30% require?

Setting aside short-term volatility, I personally consider a rise of at least 30% in subsequent local launch pricing benchmarks relative to earlier low-land-cost projects to be relatively likely. This is my scenario assessment, based on higher land costs alongside construction, financing and development expenditure. It does not mean Thomson Reserve must appreciate by 30% from today’s purchase price.

Model dated 22 October 2026. Selling price = (land cost + other development costs) × 1.15 ÷ (saleable area / GFA). The 15% is a cost markup, not a net sales margin. To illustrate transmission, all three columns assume saleable area / GFA of 100%; actual project ratios were not obtained. Demolition, building specifications, financing duration and sales pace affect results. The values 700, 850 and 15% are scenario inputs, not verified costs. With other costs unchanged, the land difference implies only about a 23.1% modelled price difference. Reaching 30% requires other costs to rise from 700 to at least around 829, or additional effects from area efficiency, margins or other factors. This illustrates the conditions for 30%; it is not statistical evidence of a higher probability. That probability assessment is Kevin’s personal view. The starting point is a hypothetical earlier-cost selling-price benchmark, not today’s published starting price or a buyer’s transaction price.

Real scarcity combines location, environment and everyday efficiency.

Housing scarcity must translate into daily use: an established location, transport, natural surroundings and space that suits a family. In my view, assets combining these conditions merit long-term consideration. Assess layouts through furniture scale, corridors, daylight, storage and family activities.

An established location is more than a label. Rail, shopping, dining, schools and nature must work together along everyday routes to remain useful to families. A seemingly larger home may be a less suitable upgrade if it adds daily commuting time.

Imagine an ordinary weekday: groceries collected on the way home, children reaching activities without waiting for a parent’s car, and older relatives visiting the mall independently. These improvements do not depend on a future sale to be realised. They distinguish a home from a purely financial asset, although families value conveniences differently.

If an actual route saves 20 minutes a day over 220 working days, it returns roughly 73 hours a year to the family. This is a personal time-return scenario; actual savings depend on the location and daily routes.

Lifestyle benefits also have costs. More facilities call for questions about management fees, upkeep and peak-time use. Proximity to nature requires checking entrances, walking paths and unit orientation. Scarcity needs practical usability and must fit the budget.

Thomson Reserve: testing growth, scarcity and cost advantages against the entry price.

Thomson Reserve brings together Upper Thomson’s established amenities, operating rail access, nature, a large site and family-oriented homes. In my view, it has notable scarcity attributes and an earlier land-cost advantage. Buyers’ central task is to determine whether actual quotations reflect those values.

Upper Thomson MRT is already operating, so rail convenience can be tested in daily life. Walk from the specific block to the station, then assess the entire journey to work, school and older relatives. [8]

Thomson Plaza, dining and natural surroundings provide a foundation for everyday life. NParks materials provide more information on public nature areas around the Central Catchment and MacRitchie. School distances, registration phases and eligibility must be checked against the relevant year’s official rules; a nearby school does not guarantee a place. [9]

The developer’s 15 October materials describe around five hectares and 1,268 homes, with about 88% of land allocated to landscaping, water features and facilities, a building footprint around 12%, and three planned clubhouses. The 88% is not purely a greenery ratio or private space for each home. A large site creates facility possibilities but also requires scrutiny of management and usage efficiency. [10]

Starting prices apply to specific units, not all floors and orientations, and do not represent current available inventory. Personal taxes and other transaction costs are excluded. Source: [10].

If your budget is near the three-bedroom starting price, compare what the same total budget buys in nearby resale developments in terms of size, age and move-in timing. If immediate occupancy matters more, include the construction wait and interim rent. A lower psf does not necessarily mean a lower total price or a better family fit.

The development has a 99-year lease. Developer materials state a lease commencement of 14 July 2026 and estimated TOP in the second half of 2030. Construction time, remaining lease, maintenance and future resale competition are all costs. If another project offers a better total price, area or commute after comparison, choosing it is equally consistent with this framework. [10]

Upgrade or wait: let your circumstances support the decision.

Buying at the right price has two dimensions: value relative to the market and alternative properties, and affordability relative to your finances and family plans. A market opportunity may exist without immediate action being suitable. Conversely, clear family needs and robust finances can justify starting comparisons before every macro variable is settled.

I suggest writing the final judgment in three lines. First: what exactly does the upgrade improve, and which requirements are non-negotiable? Second: what is the full cash flow through purchase and transition, and can you keep holding in an adverse scenario? Third: who might buy it later, and why would they pay that total price? If these remain unclear, waiting and further research are valuable work.

My view is that sustained economic and wealth growth, support for population-driven demand and higher costs at some new sites provide long-term support for Singapore housing. Families’ next step is to use actual prices, cash flow and improvements in daily life to decide when to upgrade.

Share Singapore's Growth.
Own Scarce Assets.
Buy at the Right Price. Share Singapore’s growth. Own scarce assets. Buy at the right price.

This is general market research and housing-choice analysis, not individual financial advice or a promise of returns. Historical performance, research scenarios and developer materials cannot guarantee future returns.