What is the best way to short the San Francisco real estate market?
The most obvious route is to short the lenders, preferably subprime. Since there are no lenders that operate exclusively in San Francisco, you could look north at Canada. The Canadian real estate market (esp. Vancouver) is just as overheated as the San Francisco market. As a start, famous short seller Marc Cohodes recommends HCG (Home Capital Group) as an opportune short. You could short home builders who do a lot of their business in Northern California.  (Not just San Francisco, Silicon Valley, or even the Bay Area.)  Home prices in Sacramento and the northern San Joaquin Valley are correlated with Bay Area home prices. Many of these builders went broke during the last bust, so you might have trouble finding a publicly traded home builder that is concentrated in just one market.
There are many ways to value a business. Here is a simple method to get a ball park number on most businesses. This business is made of two parts. For the real estate: For the business:  I would consider this type of small business riskier than the stock market and so you should expect a higher return. Maybe 15 or 20%? If the rental business makes $50k profit (not revenue) and that is 20% return of your investment, the business is worth $250k. If the business makes no money or if they only make money because they don't take a salary then this is a hobby and not a business. There's no business to buy here and you are just bidding on the real estate to do with what you please. The assets worth $600k and the business worth $250k would be added together for a fair sale price of $850k. Adjust for your actual numbers and you should be able to get a ball park of what you think the business is worth. If you do the math and it works out that you'll make 1-3% on your business, compare that to investing in other places. If it works out that you'll make 40% on your money that's pretty awesome too. "I didn't idly pick the SF Bay as my model. That place was literally ""Rust-Belt West"" after industrial contraction starting at the end of WWII and continuing through the '70s.   But the Silicon Valley boom didn't revitalize the former industrial areas, but merely a few 'gentrified' spots, *like where those buses originate*.  Those 400K new 'service/support' jobs *won't pay enough* to allow the workers to live *in the city*. They'll be commuting from *beyond* the upper-crust suburbs you mention, [just like these Californians](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/business/economy/san-francisco-commute.html)." I have this exact same issue.  Event the dollar amounts are close.  Here is how I am looking at the problem. Option 1:  Walk away.  Goodbye credit for 7+ years.  Luckily I can operate in cash with the extra $800 per month, but should I have a non medical emergency I might be SOL.  With a family I am not sure I am willing to risk it.  What if my car dies the month after I quit paying and the bank chooses to foreclose?  What if my wife or I lose our job and we have no credit to live? Option 2:  Short sale.  Good if I can let it happen.  I might or might not be on the hook for the balance depending on the state.  If I am on the hook, okay, suck but I could live.  If I am not on the hook, it is going to hurt my credit the same as foreclosure.  It isn't easy, you need an experienced real estate agent and a willing bank.   Option 3:  Keep paying.  I am going for this.  At the moment I can still afford the house even though it is at the expense of some luxuries in my live.  (Cable TV, driving to work, a new computer).  I am wagering the market fixes itself in the next several years.  Should the S hit the fan in most any manner, the mortgage is the first thing I stop paying. I don't know what other options I have.  I can't re-fi; too upside down.  I can't sell; the house isn't worth the mortgage (and I don't have the cash for the balance).  I can't walk away; the credit hit wouldn't be worth the monthly money gain. I have no emotions about the house.  I am in a real bad investment and getting out now seems like a good idea, but I am going to guess that having the house 10 years from now is better than not.  I don't care about the bank at all, nor do I feel I owe them the money because I took the loan.  They assumed risk loaning me the money in the first place.  The minute it gets worse for me than for the bank; I will stop paying. Summary Not much to do without a serious consequence.  I would suggest holding out for the very long term if you feel you can.  The best way to minimize the bad investment is to ride it out and pray it gets better.  I am thinking I am a landlord for the next 10 years. "In San Francisco (home of super-expensive real estate and more than a bit of marijuana use) you'll see people asking up front for ""first and last months' rent"" plus a security deposit when you move in somewhere. If someone can't come up with the cash, then it looks like this is the last month... and time to look for a new roommate. of course, it can be difficult to implement this arrangement if you've already moved in with a bunch of people, and if it's not common in an area people may balk at the money required up front, but.... it is a reliable way to deal with people flaking out on the rent money." "With no numbers offered, it's not like we can tell you if it's a wise   purchase. -- JoeTaxpayer We can, however, talk about the qualitative tradeoffs of renting vs owning. The major drawback which you won't hear enough about is risk. You will be putting a very large portion of your net worth in what is effectively a single asset. This is somewhat risky. What happens if the regional economy takes a hit, and you get laid off? Chances are you won't be the only one, and the value of your house will take a hit at the same time, a double-whammy. If you need to sell and move away for a job in another town, you will be taking a financial hit - that is, if you can sell and still cover your mortgage. You will definitely not be able to walk away and find a new cheap apartment to scrimp on expenses for a little while. Buying a house is putting down roots. On the other hand, you will be free from the opposite risk: rising rents. Once you've purchased the house, and as long as you're living in it, you don't ever need to worry about a local economic boom and a bunch of people moving into town and making more money than you, pushing up rents. (The San Francisco Bay Area is an example of where that has happened. Gentrification has its malcontents.) Most of the rest is a numbers game. Don't get fooled into thinking that you're ""throwing away"" money on renting - if you really want to, you can save money yourself, and invest a sum approximately equal to your down payment in the stock market, in some diversified mutual funds, and you will earn returns on that at a rate similar to what you would get by building equity in your home. (You won't earn outsized housing-bubble-of-2007 returns, but you shouldn't expect those in the housing market of today anyway.) Also, if you own, you have broad discretion over what you can do with the property. But you have to take care of the maintenance and stuff too." Buy low, sell high - the problem, of course, finding a crystal ball that will tell you when the highs and lows are going to happen :-) You could, for instance, save your money in cash and wait for the occasional sharp drop, but then you've lost profits & dividends from having that cash under the mattress all those years you were waiting. About the closest I've ever gotten to market timing, and I think the closest anyone can get in real life, is that I cut personal spending to the bone from 2008 to 2011, and invested every spare cent.  But such opportunities only come along a few times in a lifetime. The other thing is to avoid what a lot of people do, which you might call anti-timing.  When the market is high, they jump on the bandwagon, then when it drops they panic-sell, and lose money. Shorts are difficult because you have to find someone to lend the stock to you. In contrast, put options don't require that. They also have some nice properties like you're only out the contract price. The options chain for BSFT will give you an idea of where the market is.  Keep in mind that BSFT only IPO'd last year and announced blowout earnings recently. Make sure the P:E you're looking at is using recent earnings reports! "Remember that the rental market and the property market are markets.  For any given location and level of quality, if it were a clearly superior choice to buy over rent, then more people would buy, and less would rent, driving prices down for rentals.  The value of ""owning"" as opposed to paying rent and never owning is priced into that, at least at locations and levels of quality where owning is a possibility (and that is nearly always a possibility, even at very low levels of quality). This is true even disregarding your personal circumstances, unless you're looking in an area that has a lot of people like you (San Francisco, perhaps).  Given your personal circumstances, you have strong incentives to be on the renting side, unless there are major pressures on the housing market that cause property to be far cheaper than it should.  This was true in 2009-2011, but is mostly not true anymore (though some areas have yet to fully come out of the crash)."