...
By Giulia Carbonaro
Senior Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The number of Americans living in multigenerational households has risen in recent years, according to a new report by Realtor.com, as the high cost of living, housing, and childcare are making living with the parents increasingly appealing.
Nearly 3 million count at least two mothers living under one roof, says the report, a sign that young families are leaning on the grandparents to help raise their offspring.
“Multigenerational living is becoming an increasingly common choice for American families as high housing and childcare costs create strong reasons for co-living,” said Jiayi Xu, an economist at Realtor.com, said in a statement.
Read More on News
As of 2024, there were nearly 4 million multigenerational households in owner-occupied homes across the country, representing 4.5 percent of all owner-occupied households, up from 4.3 percent in 2019.
The typical multigenerational household includes five people sharing a four-bedroom home, with a median annual household income of $131,000, according to Realtor.com.
Why Are Americans Choosing to Live With Family?
The share of multigenerational households in the nation has quadrupled between 1971 and 2021, according to a Pew Research Center study, growing from 7 percent to a whopping 18 percent.
Since then, it has continued increasing, fueled by Americans’ desire (and necessity) to cut costs.
Moving back in with a parent—or never moving out—is no longer a "Plan B" option for many Americans. For young people struggling to step on the property ladder because of higher borrowing costs and higher home prices, staying with family offers several advantages: sharing rent and mortgage payments, saving on childcare costs and long-term care for aging relatives.
While it varies notably based on age, race, and geography, this spike in interest for multigenerational housing—a way of living that was common before World War II—has been widespread across the country.
Nearly 45 percent of those living in owner-occupied multigenerational households are white, according to the report, 25.8 percent are Hispanic, 13.5 percent are Black, and 11.1 percent are Asian—figures that reflect the U.S. diversity.
But multigenerational housing is most prevalent in urban markets in the West and along the East Coast, the report found, where housing costs, inventory availability, and cultural tradition have made multigenerational living a more common option for residents.
Multigenerational Housing Is Reshaping the U.S. Market
Growing demand for multigenerational homes is enabling sellers offering this kind of property to set their asking price higher than their peers in the standard home market, where sales are dwindling, researchers found.
According to the Realtor.com report, the median list price for a multigenerational house was $709,000 in 2025, 65 percent higher than the $429,900 median asked by sellers for a standard listing.
Multigenerational homes naturally have a higher price tag than standard homes because they are typically bigger. But sellers are able to ask for more also because there are not so many properties that fit the bill, especially in Southern and Eastern markets where supply is thin.
Multigenerational homes are properties of which descriptions include keywords such as “guest house,” “in-law suite” or “granny-flat,” according to Realtor.com.
Cities in the West account for the highest share of multigenerational home listings in the nation, according to Realtor.com, averaging around 14 percent, compared to 6.1 percent in the South, 5.3 percent in the Northeast, and just 2.9 percent in the Midwest.
The highest number of listings are all in California: Los Angeles (23.7 percent), San Diego (22.7 percent), San Jose (18.0 percent), San Francisco (17.4 percent) and Riverside (14.9 percent).
Do you live in a multigenerational household? Share your experience with us by emailing g.carbonaro@newsweek.com
This shortage of supply in much of the country is why, even on a per-square-foot basis, sellers can afford to put their multigenerational homes up for $262 per-square-foot versus $215 for standard homes, a 22 percent premium, according to Realtor.com.
Detroit, Cleveland and Buffalo rank among the lowest metropolitan areas for multigenerational listing share, at 2.0 percent, 3.1 percent, and 2.5 percent, respectively.
In these markets, buyers are facing asking price premiums of 120 percent, 107 percent and 94 percent over standard listings, the report found.
“In markets like Detroit and Cleveland, multigenerational homes are a rare find, and when one hits the market, buyers respond,” said Hannah Jones, senior economic research analyst at Realtor.com.
“The strong demand and steep premiums we are seeing in inventory-constrained markets point to a real mismatch between what buyers are looking for and what is actually available. For sellers in these markets, this type of home can be a significant asset.”
Buyers, who have been withdrawing to the sidelines of the U.S. market for months now due to the ongoing affordability crisis and growing economic uncertainty, are not deterred when it comes to multigenerational homes.
According to Realtor.com, multigenerational listings received 13.5 percent more page views than standard homes and sold in the same median timeframe 59 days.
Detroit multigenerational home listings attract 82 percent more page views than standard homes, Realtor.com found. In Cleveland, they fetch 78 percent more.
According to Jones, multigenerational living is now “a meaningful force” in the U.S. housing market.
“A sense of shared purpose and care is at the heart of multigenerational living, a housing arrangement that is quietly shaping American family life,” she said in a statement. “What stands out in this data is that buyers are not being deterred by the higher price tags. The demand is strong and in a few parts of the country, the supply is struggling to keep up.”
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines