Rental Vacancy Rates by City in 2026: 75 U.S. Metro Areas Ranked
Rental vacancy rates by city vary widely across the United States. Among the 75 largest metropolitan statistical areas measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, Buffalo-Cheektowaga, New York had the highest rental vacancy point estimate in the second quarter of 2026 at 22.0%. Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, Texas and San Antonio-New Braunfels, Texas were tied at 16.9%, while San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, California had the lowest point estimate at 0.5%.
The national rental vacancy rate was 7.3% in Q2 2026. Across the 75 metro areas, 29 had point estimates above that national rate, one matched it, and 45 were below it.
There is an important geography detail behind this ranking. The authoritative Census dataset reports the figures for Metropolitan Statistical Areas, or MSAs, rather than municipal city limits. An MSA can include a central city plus surrounding communities that are economically and socially connected to it. The figures in this article should therefore be read as metro-area estimates, not city-limit statistics.
The figures come from the Census Bureau’s Housing Vacancies and Homeownership data and represent Q2 2026 point estimates. Because the CPS/HVS is a sample survey, every metro estimate also comes with a margin of error. Those uncertainty ranges matter, especially where two metros appear close together in the ranking.
Rental Vacancy Rates by City: 75 U.S. Metro Areas Ranked
The table below ranks the 75 largest U.S. metro areas from the highest to the lowest published rental vacancy point estimate for Q2 2026.
The margin of error is shown in percentage points. Census explains that adding and subtracting the margin of error from the published estimate forms a 90% confidence interval. Identical point estimates are treated as ties using competition ranking, so the next rank is skipped after a tie.
| Rank | Metro area (MSA) | Q2 2026 rental vacancy rate | Margin of error |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Buffalo-Cheektowaga, NY | 22.0% | ±9.7 pp |
| 2 | Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX | 16.9% | ±4.9 pp |
| 2 | San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX | 16.9% | ±5.3 pp |
| 4 | Greenville-Anderson-Greer, SC | 16.4% | ±9.1 pp |
| 5 | Tucson, AZ | 15.3% | ±8.0 pp |
| 6 | Birmingham, AL | 14.5% | ±5.6 pp |
| 7 | New Orleans-Metairie, LA | 14.1% | ±5.6 pp |
| 8 | McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX | 13.5% | ±9.4 pp |
| 9 | Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX | 12.9% | ±3.0 pp |
| 10 | Baton Rouge, LA | 12.2% | ±5.8 pp |
| 11 | Indianapolis-Carmel-Greenwood, IN | 11.8% | ±5.3 pp |
| 12 | Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX | 11.7% | ±2.5 pp |
| 13 | Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA | 11.2% | ±7.9 pp |
| 14 | Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL | 10.5% | ±3.6 pp |
| 15 | Memphis, TN-AR-MS | 10.1% | ±4.2 pp |
| 16 | Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA | 9.6% | ±2.9 pp |
| 16 | Nashville-Davidson–Murfreesboro–Franklin, TN | 9.6% | ±4.0 pp |
| 18 | Jacksonville, FL | 9.3% | ±5.2 pp |
| 19 | Kansas City, MO-KS | 9.1% | ±3.0 pp |
| 19 | Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL | 9.1% | ±2.7 pp |
| 21 | Raleigh-Cary, NC | 8.9% | ±5.5 pp |
| 22 | Cleveland, OH | 8.4% | ±4.3 pp |
| 23 | Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ | 8.0% | ±2.8 pp |
| 24 | Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN | 7.9% | ±4.9 pp |
| 25 | Bakersfield-Delano, CA | 7.8% | ±6.1 pp |
| 26 | Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI | 7.7% | ±3.1 pp |
| 26 | Virginia Beach-Chesapeake-Norfolk, VA-NC | 7.7% | ±5.1 pp |
| 28 | Las Vegas-Henderson-North Las Vegas, NV | 7.6% | ±2.6 pp |
| 29 | Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY | 7.5% | ±6.4 pp |
| 30 | Denver-Aurora-Centennial, CO | 7.3% | ±3.3 pp |
| 31 | Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC | 7.2% | ±3.9 pp |
| 31 | Oklahoma City, OK | 7.2% | ±3.5 pp |
| 33 | Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH | 7.0% | ±2.1 pp |
| 34 | Albuquerque, NM | 6.9% | ±3.4 pp |
| 34 | Columbia, SC | 6.9% | ±5.7 pp |
| 34 | Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI | 6.9% | ±4.2 pp |
| 34 | Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI | 6.9% | ±3.3 pp |
| 38 | Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT | 6.7% | ±5.7 pp |
| 38 | Provo-Orem-Lehi, UT | 6.7% | ±5.3 pp |
| 40 | Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN | 6.6% | ±1.9 pp |
| 40 | Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD | 6.6% | ±2.4 pp |
| 40 | St. Louis, MO-IL | 6.6% | ±3.4 pp |
| 43 | Richmond, VA | 6.2% | ±5.1 pp |
| 43 | Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV | 6.2% | ±2.2 pp |
| 45 | Akron, OH | 6.1% | ±5.5 pp |
| 45 | Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD | 6.1% | ±3.4 pp |
| 47 | Pittsburgh, PA | 5.9% | ±3.5 pp |
| 48 | Boise City, ID | 5.8% | ±3.0 pp |
| 48 | Urban Honolulu, HI | 5.8% | ±2.6 pp |
| 50 | Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA | 5.7% | ±2.6 pp |
| 51 | Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL | 5.5% | ±6.9 pp |
| 51 | New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ | 5.5% | ±1.1 pp |
| 53 | Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA | 5.2% | ±2.5 pp |
| 53 | Tulsa, OK | 5.2% | ±4.0 pp |
| 55 | Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA | 5.1% | ±1.2 pp |
| 56 | Rochester, NY | 4.7% | ±5.6 pp |
| 57 | Columbus, OH | 4.5% | ±3.8 pp |
| 57 | Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA | 4.5% | ±3.0 pp |
| 59 | Kiryas Joel-Poughkeepsie-Newburgh, NY | 4.4% | ±5.5 pp |
| 60 | San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA | 4.2% | ±1.9 pp |
| 61 | Grand Rapids-Wyoming-Kentwood, MI | 4.1% | ±4.9 pp |
| 62 | Fresno, CA | 4.0% | ±4.7 pp |
| 63 | Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ | 3.9% | ±5.0 pp |
| 64 | Providence-Warwick, RI-MA | 3.8% | ±1.8 pp |
| 64 | Stockton-Lodi, CA | 3.8% | ±5.8 pp |
| 66 | Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL | 3.7% | ±2.5 pp |
| 67 | Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA | 3.6% | ±2.2 pp |
| 68 | Salt Lake City-Murray, UT | 3.5% | ±2.6 pp |
| 69 | Omaha, NE-IA | 3.4% | ±2.5 pp |
| 70 | Worcester, MA | 3.2% | ±3.9 pp |
| 71 | San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA | 2.9% | ±2.0 pp |
| 72 | Bridgeport-Stamford-Danbury, CT | 2.8% | ±3.3 pp |
| 73 | Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN | 2.3% | ±2.4 pp |
| 74 | Knoxville, TN | 1.7% | ±2.7 pp |
| 75 | San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA | 0.5% | ±0.9 pp |
How to read the ranking: The table orders the Census point estimates. It does not prove that every metro ranked above another metro has a statistically higher underlying vacancy rate. Several of the estimates have large margins of error relative to the published rate.
Metro Areas With the Highest Rental Vacancy Rates
The upper end of the table contains several point estimates well above the 7.3% national Q2 rate, but the uncertainty ranges are an important part of the picture.
Buffalo-Cheektowaga, New York has the highest published point estimate at 22.0%, with a margin of error of ±9.7 percentage points. Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos and San Antonio-New Braunfels are tied for the next-highest point estimate at 16.9%, with margins of error of ±4.9 and ±5.3 percentage points, respectively.
The next highest point estimates are:
- Greenville-Anderson-Greer, South Carolina: 16.4% ±9.1 pp
- Tucson, Arizona: 15.3% ±8.0 pp
- Birmingham, Alabama: 14.5% ±5.6 pp
- New Orleans-Metairie, Louisiana: 14.1% ±5.6 pp
- McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, Texas: 13.5% ±9.4 pp
These figures describe estimated rental availability within each metro’s rental inventory. They should not be converted automatically into claims that a market is weak, that rents are falling, or that renters will necessarily find inexpensive housing. Vacancy is one housing-market measure, and its meaning depends on local supply, demand, rents, property mix, new construction, and the statistical uncertainty surrounding the estimate.
Metro Areas With the Lowest Rental Vacancy Rates
At the other end of the ranking, San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, California has the lowest Q2 2026 point estimate at 0.5%, with a margin of error of ±0.9 percentage points.
The next lowest point estimates are:
- Knoxville, Tennessee: 1.7% ±2.7 pp
- Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana: 2.3% ±2.4 pp
- Bridgeport-Stamford-Danbury, Connecticut: 2.8% ±3.3 pp
- San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, California: 2.9% ±2.0 pp
- Worcester, Massachusetts: 3.2% ±3.9 pp
A low vacancy point estimate means a smaller share of the measured rental inventory was estimated to be vacant and available for rent, but it does not tell a renter whether the available units are affordable, suitable, or located in a particular neighborhood. The Census measure is useful for comparing rental availability at the metro level, not for evaluating a specific apartment search.
How the 75 Metro Areas Compare With the U.S. Rental Vacancy Rate
The Census Bureau reported a 7.3% national rental vacancy rate for Q2 2026 in its Second Quarter 2026 Housing Vacancies and Homeownership release.
Using that national point estimate as a reference:
- 29 metro areas were above 7.3%
- 1 metro area was exactly 7.3%
- 45 metro areas were below 7.3%
- 15 metro areas had point estimates of 10% or higher
- 20 metro areas had point estimates below 5%
Denver-Aurora-Centennial, Colorado was the one metro with a point estimate exactly equal to the 7.3% national rate.
The median point estimate across the 75 MSAs was 6.7%. The distance between the highest and lowest published point estimates was 21.5 percentage points.
Those comparisons are descriptive. A metro being above or below the national point estimate does not establish a statistically significant difference without considering the relevant margins of error.
What Does the Rental Vacancy Rate Measure?
The Census Bureau defines the rental vacancy rate as the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant for rent.
In simplified terms, the measure compares vacant units that are available for rent with the rental inventory used in the survey. Census definitions include renter-occupied units and the applicable vacant rental units in the denominator, with specific treatment for units that have been rented but are not yet occupied.
That distinction matters because not every vacant housing unit is available for rent. A property may be vacant for seasonal use, held off the market, awaiting occupancy, or vacant for another reason. Those situations are not interchangeable with a unit that is currently offered for rent.
The CPS/HVS measure is also broader than an apartment-only vacancy report. It is a residential rental-inventory measure, so it should not be treated as a ranking limited to professionally managed apartment buildings. Apartment-only vacancy is a separate search intent and is outside the scope of this ranking.
Why a “City” Vacancy Ranking Uses Metro Areas
A person searching for the vacancy rate in Austin, Buffalo, Miami, or San Jose may naturally use the word “city.” The Census table, however, is organized around the 75 largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas.
That difference is not cosmetic. A metro area can extend beyond the legal boundary of the principal city and may cross county or even state lines. For example, the Washington-Arlington-Alexandria MSA spans the District of Columbia, Virginia, Maryland, and West Virginia. The Kansas City MSA includes areas in both Missouri and Kansas.
For that reason, a rate in this table should be described as the vacancy rate for the named metro area, not as a city-limit statistic. Readers who need municipality-level vacancy data would need a different source and geography.
Why the Margins of Error Matter
The CPS/HVS is a sample survey rather than a complete count of every rental property. That makes the published margin of error essential to interpreting the metro estimates.
Census states that the margin of error, when added to and subtracted from the estimate, forms the 90% confidence interval. A larger margin of error relative to the estimate means the estimate is less precise.
Buffalo illustrates why this matters. Its point estimate is 22.0% with a ±9.7 percentage-point margin of error. Austin’s point estimate is 16.9% with a ±4.9-point margin. Those uncertainty ranges overlap substantially. It would therefore be too strong to say the survey proves Buffalo’s true rental vacancy rate is definitively higher than Austin’s simply because Buffalo occupies the first row of the ranking.
The same caution applies throughout the table. The ranking is useful for organizing the published point estimates, but the rank number should not be read as a precision score.
Can 2026 Metro Vacancy Rates Be Compared Directly With 2025?
Not as a blanket year-over-year metro ranking.
Beginning in the first quarter of 2026, CPS/HVS began using new Metropolitan Statistical Area definitions announced by the Office of Management and Budget in February 2023, based on the 2020 OMB standards applied to 2020 Census data.
The Census Q2 2026 Source and Accuracy documentation cautions that MSA data for 2026 should be compared with earlier MSA data carefully because CPS/HVS began using new 2020-based metropolitan definitions in the first quarter of 2026.
That is why this article does not calculate a 2025-to-2026 percentage-point change for every metro. A year-over-year comparison would require checking whether each geography is truly comparable across the two periods before treating the difference as a market change.
There is another 2025 limitation worth noting. Due to a lapse in federal funding, CPS/HVS did not collect October 2025 data. That affects the time basis of the 2025 annual and fourth-quarter estimates and is another reason not to build a simplistic annual-to-quarterly metro change ranking.
Rental Vacancy Rates by State vs. Metro Area
Metro and state vacancy rankings answer different geographic questions.
This article looks at the 75 largest MSAs in Q2 2026. Real Estate Lynx’s Rental Vacancy Rate by State in 2026 compares all 50 states using the latest completed annual state dataset instead.
That distinction matters when a metro crosses state lines or when conditions in one metropolitan area differ sharply from the state as a whole. A statewide rate blends many local rental markets together, while an MSA estimate narrows the geography to a major labor and housing market.
For broader context on vacancy, rents, construction, employment, household formation, and other forces affecting rental markets, see the Housing Economy hub.
Methodology
This ranking uses the U.S. Census Bureau’s Table 4: Rental Vacancy Rates for the 75 Largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas: 2026, from the Current Population Survey/Housing Vacancy Survey.
The methodology used for this article is:
- Use the Second Quarter 2026 estimate, the latest populated period in the current Census MSA table as of this article’s publication.
- Include all 75 MSAs in the official table.
- Rank the published rental vacancy point estimates from highest to lowest.
- Preserve identical published values as ties using competition ranking.
- Show the Census margin of error beside every estimate.
- Use the national Q2 2026 rental vacancy rate of 7.3% only as a descriptive benchmark.
- Do not treat neighboring rank positions as statistically distinct without additional significance testing.
- Do not calculate a blanket 2025-to-2026 MSA change ranking because the metropolitan delineations changed in 2026.
The Census notes that a margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s reliability and that adding and subtracting it from the point estimate forms a 90% confidence interval. The agency also cautions users about direct comparisons between the revised 2026 MSA series and earlier years.
The Q2 2026 Source and Accuracy documentation states that the quarter’s estimates average data collected in April, May, and June 2026 and that the average weighted CPS response rate for those three months was 67%.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which city has the highest rental vacancy rate in 2026?
Among the 75 largest MSAs in the Census Q2 2026 table, Buffalo-Cheektowaga, New York had the highest published rental vacancy point estimate at 22.0%. Its margin of error was ±9.7 percentage points, so the estimate should be interpreted with substantial uncertainty.
Which metro area has the lowest rental vacancy rate?
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, California had the lowest Q2 2026 point estimate at 0.5%, with a margin of error of ±0.9 percentage points.
What was the U.S. rental vacancy rate in Q2 2026?
The national rental vacancy rate was 7.3% in the second quarter of 2026, according to the Census Bureau.
What is a good rental vacancy rate?
There is no single rental vacancy rate that is automatically “good” for every metro. A lower rate can indicate tighter availability, while a higher rate can indicate more vacant rental inventory relative to the measured rental stock. But rents, affordability, property type, new construction, household demand, and sampling uncertainty all affect how a local rate should be interpreted.
The 7.3% national Q2 2026 rate is useful as context, not as a target that every metro should match.
Is a high rental vacancy rate good or bad?
Neither conclusion follows from the vacancy rate alone. A higher rate means a larger share of the measured rental inventory is vacant and available for rent. The reason for that vacancy can differ from one market to another, so the rate should be interpreted alongside local rents, supply, demand, and development conditions.
Does the Census measure cities or metro areas in this ranking?
The official Census table measures Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Each figure in this ranking is therefore a metro-area estimate and should not be treated as a municipal city-limit rate.
Are apartment vacancy rates the same as these rental vacancy rates?
No. The CPS/HVS rental vacancy rate is a residential rental-inventory measure. An apartment-only vacancy report may cover a narrower property universe, such as professionally managed multifamily buildings, and can therefore produce a different rate.
Why does this ranking use Q2 2026 instead of a full-year 2026 average?
A full-year 2026 MSA average is not yet available. Q2 2026 is the latest official populated quarter in the Census MSA table at the time of publication. Using that period makes the ranking current while keeping all 75 metros on the same measurement window.
Can I compare this table directly with the 2025 metro rates?
Use caution. Census changed its MSA definitions beginning in 2026 and warns that the revised geographies may not be directly comparable with earlier years. A reliable year-over-year comparison requires checking the geography for the specific metro first.
What the 2026 Metro Vacancy Ranking Can Tell You
The 75-metro table shows how widely published rental vacancy point estimates differ across major U.S. rental markets. It also shows why a simple rank can be misleading when the survey uncertainty is ignored.
At one end, Buffalo’s point estimate is 22.0%. At the other, San Jose’s is 0.5%. Between them are markets with very different rental inventories, development patterns, and local conditions. The useful takeaway is not that rank 12 is inherently better or worse than rank 25. It is that rental availability varies substantially by metro and should be interpreted with the geography, measurement period, and margin of error attached.
For a broader geographic comparison, continue with the state rental vacancy ranking. For the economic forces behind rental-market conditions, use the Housing Economy guide.
Sources
- U.S. Census Bureau: Housing Vacancies and Homeownership Data Tables
- U.S. Census Bureau: Second Quarter 2026 Housing Vacancies and Homeownership
- U.S. Census Bureau: Housing Vacancy Survey Definitions
- U.S. Census Bureau: CPS/HVS Frequently Asked Questions
- U.S. Census Bureau: Table 4, Rental Vacancy Rates for the 75 Largest MSAs: 2026
- U.S. Census Bureau: Q2 2026 Source and Accuracy of Estimates
