Nearly One in Five Prime Resales Lost Money: Why EC Buyers Came Out Ahead

A prime address can command a premium. It doesn’t guarantee the next buyer will pay more.

That is the clearest lesson from Cushman & Wakefield’s analysis of private-home resale and sub-sale transactions in the third quarter of 2026. Among transactions with a matching purchase record within the preceding 10 years, 19.5% of Core Central Region (CCR) deals recorded a gross loss.

Meanwhile, all five leading percentage gains came from Hundred Palms Residences, an executive condominium (EC) in the Outside Central Region.

The contrast raises a more useful question than whether prime homes or suburban properties are “better”: How much future value was already reflected in the original purchase price?

What the figures actually show

The study matched 2,021 resale and sub-sale transactions with earlier purchases. Of these, 93—or 4.6%—recorded a gross loss, the highest proportion since Q2 2022. Loss-making deals were considerably more prevalent in the CCR.

These figures measure the difference between purchase and sale prices. They are not a government price index, nor do they show that nearly one in five existing CCR owners is currently sitting on a loss.

Nevertheless, the gap is substantial. It challenges the assumption that centrality alone provides reliable protection against a disappointing resale outcome.

Prime location can be an advantage that buyers have already paid for

A desirable location contributes to a property’s value. The investment question is whether that advantage was bought at a reasonable price.

When a purchase price already incorporates strong expectations for prestige, rental demand and future appreciation, the property must subsequently justify those expectations. Even a well-located home can struggle to generate a capital gain if the initial price leaves little room for further growth.

The Marina One Residences example illustrates this risk. A 710 sq ft unit bought for approximately S$1.83 million subsequently sold for S$1.25 million, a gross decline of about 32%.

This does not establish that the original buyer overpaid relative to comparable transactions at the time. It does demonstrate that a central address did not prevent a substantial loss.

For buyers, the practical implication is straightforward: assess a development’s location alongside its entry price, competing resale options, and the likely budget of future purchasers.

A prestigious address can remain prestigious while its resale price falls.

Why EC buyers started from a different position

The strongest percentage gains at Hundred Palms Residences reflect a very different starting point.

HDB treats buying an EC directly from a developer as receiving a housing subsidy. However, access comes with eligibility conditions and resale restrictions. These are meaningful trade-offs, rather than an unrestricted opportunity available to every buyer.

For older EC developments subject to a five-year minimum occupation period, eligible owners can subsequently sell to Singapore citizens and permanent residents. Resale buyers face no monthly household income ceiling. Citizenship restrictions are removed after 10 years from the Temporary Occupation Permit date.

This creates a potential advantage: the original owner buys within a restricted market, then eventually sells into a broader one.

The financial benefit still depends on the price paid and how the surrounding market develops. But the route to resale is different from buying a private condominium whose price already reflects access to its existing buyer pool.

At Hundred Palms, the reported leading transaction involved a purchase at approximately S$860,000 and a resale at S$2.26 million. The relatively low starting price was crucial to the scale of the percentage gain.

That is why the comparison should not be reduced to suburban location beating central location. The original purchase terms and price bases were fundamentally different.

A nine-year gain is not an annual return

Headline percentages can make property outcomes difficult to compare.

The reported Hundred Palms gain of 163.9% was accumulated over approximately nine years. Likewise, the Marina One loss developed over a substantial holding period.

Annualising the price changes provides a more consistent comparison:

Figures are rounded and reported by Cushman & Wakefield through The Business Times. Calculations using the rounded purchase and sale prices may differ slightly from the reported percentages.

Annualisation changes the perspective. Holding for many years does not automatically repair an unfavourable entry price. Equally, a large cumulative gain should not be mistaken for a return earned every year.

These figures remain measures of property-price appreciation, however. They are not complete investment returns.

Gross profit is only the beginning of the calculation

A home sold above its purchase price may still have delivered a modest financial return after costs.

A fuller assessment should account for stamp duties actually paid, legal fees, selling commissions, mortgage interest, maintenance charges, property tax and relevant renovation expenditure. For a rented property, rental income and vacancy periods also matter.

For owner-occupiers, the benefit of living in the home has value, though it differs from cash investment income.

Financing introduces another distinction. A leveraged buyer’s return on cash invested can differ substantially from the property’s price appreciation. Calculating that return properly requires the timing of deposits, loan payments, rental receipts and sale proceeds.

The same caution applies to losses. A gross capital loss does not reveal the owner’s total outcome if the property generated rental income during the holding period.

Without those cash flows, the caveat analysis cannot establish each seller’s net investment return.

Buyer taxes matter—but the data do not prove causation

Tax policy is another consideration when assessing the depth of a future buyer pool.

IRAS lists a standard Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty rate of 60% for foreigners purchasing residential property from 27 April 2023, subject to applicable remissions. Singapore citizens purchasing a second residential property generally face a 20% rate.

These acquisition costs can affect how much buyers are willing or able to commit. For a property reliant on purchasers who face substantial additional duties, this affects resale demand.

However, the transaction figures do not identify how much of the CCR’s loss-making share resulted from taxes, competing supply, unit characteristics or sellers’ individual circumstances.

Nor should current tax rates be retrospectively applied to purchases made years earlier. Any calculation of an owner’s actual return must use the duties that applied to that transaction.

Taxes provide context; they do not, by themselves, explain every loss.

The strongest counterargument: prime homes also produced major winners

The CCR results were far from uniformly weak. Three of the five largest absolute profits also came from CCR properties.

That matters because a region can contain both exceptional gains and significant losses. A regional label groups together homes with different entry prices, tenures, sizes, ages and buyer demand.

The study also has an important sampling limitation. The study includes only properties sold during the quarter with an identifiable purchase within the preceding 10 years. It excludes longer-held homes and owners who did not sell.

Consequently, the findings describe realised outcomes for a particular transaction sample. They do not establish the probability that a buyer purchasing a CCR home today will lose money.

Similarly, the five best-performing EC transactions are exceptional results, not the average experience of all EC owners.

What buyers should take from the comparison?

The most useful lesson is to examine the conditions behind a gain, rather than buy the category that topped the latest rankings.

For a prime condominium, that means asking whether its price is supported by comparable resale homes and a sufficiently broad pool of future buyers.

For an EC, it means assessing whether today’s entry price still offers an attractive relationship to competing private homes. A buyer entering at a much higher price cannot assume the appreciation enjoyed by a 2017 purchaser will repeat.

Buyers must also check the rules applying to the particular EC project. HDB now specifies a 10-year minimum occupation period for projects whose land sales tenders closed on or after 8 May 2026; the older five-year framework should not be assumed for every future launch.

The central question is therefore not simply, “Is this a prime condominium or an EC?”

It is: “At this purchase price, who is likely to buy from me later—and what would justify them paying more?”

That question connects the CCR losses and the Hundred Palms gains more clearly than geography alone.

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute financial, investment or legal advice. The analysis draws on reported caveat data for transactions with an identifiable purchase within the preceding 10 years and does not represent all properties or owners. Reported gains and losses reflect gross price changes, excluding transaction costs, taxes, financing costs and rental income. Individual outcomes vary, and past performance does not guarantee future returns. Readers should verify current information and seek independent professional advice before making property decisions.

Article contributed by Jerry Wong.

Jerry Wong is a realtor at Propnex Realty, bringing a rich background in interior and lighting design to his work. He loves exploring diverse spaces and observing the transformative power of real estate. Beyond his professional role, Jerry finds his greatest fulfillment in connecting people with the right properties, gaining immense satisfaction from helping clients achieve their dreams.