Q & A: Gathering Data, Active Listings, Brisbane Olympics and More

Question 1: How do I find reliable supply data when active listings seem dominated by house-and-land packages?

A listener notes that when checking active listings for supply, many results appear to be generated by builders marketing house-and-land packages, and asks where to find more genuine data, and whether the DSR Plus accounts for this.

Jeremy's first observation: seeing a market dominated by house-and-land packages is itself a warning sign, since the DSR simply scores demand relative to supply regardless of property type, so a market skewed this way likely warrants caution on its own. His broader advice is to check Google Maps for any high-DSR market to confirm whether large tracts of vacant land remain nearby that could still be developed, ideally staying at least 5–8 km clear of such areas.

On active listings specifically, Jeremy explains raw listing counts can be misleading, since six listings might be unusually high for a small suburb but low for a large one, meaning stock-on-market percentage (which accounts for total dwelling count) is the more reliable metric to use rather than a raw count of listings. He also highlights a genuinely strange data quirk: in some greenfield estates, off-the-plan properties can be marketed and counted as "active listings" before the land is even registered or the home built, which can push a suburb's calculated stock-on-market percentage above 100%, a clear signal something unusual is happening in that market. His overall guidance: rather than manually tracking active listings, rely on stock-on-market percentage, and trust that a well-built composite score like the DSR Plus already factors this in, rather than needing to examine individual metrics in isolation.

Question 2: How might the 2032 Brisbane Olympics affect the Brisbane property market?

Jeremy is upfront that this is a genuinely difficult question to answer with data, since Australia doesn't host Olympic Games frequently enough to build a reliable historical comparison, and with the Games still years away, there's limited value in trying to forecast that far out.

His general philosophy is to be skeptical of infrastructure-driven investment narratives altogether: small infrastructure projects tend to have negligible impact on property markets, while very large ones (which he considers the Olympics to be) tend to draw in a wave of developers responding to the same narrative, often resulting in oversupply rather than a clear investment advantage. He shares two personal examples of being caught out by this kind of thinking in the past, once believing a sales agent's claim that the Commonwealth Games would drive growth in a specific area, and separately, investing based on research showing a large amount of planned regional infrastructure spend, only to find that developers were aware of the same information and oversupplied the market in response, causing prices to fall rather than rise.

He also shares an anecdote about contacting a council and learning that buyers agents calling in were focused on questions about nearby infrastructure and amenities rather than requesting genuine market data, reinforcing his view that decisions driven by infrastructure narratives (rather than data) are common in the industry, even among professionals. Both hosts agree Brisbane may still be a reasonable long-term investment, but for reasons unrelated to the Olympics, such as consistently tight stock-on-market conditions and strong recent rental growth, rather than being used as a specific marketing angle.

Question 3: How is data like days-on-market actually gathered? Is it manual, or automated?

A listener asks whether compiling data like days-on-market requires manually searching listings every day, or whether it can be accessed through exports or subscriptions.

Jeremy confirms that at scale, this kind of tracking would be genuinely impossible to do manually and nationally, it requires monitoring individual listings from when they first appear until they sell, then aggregating that into a monthly figure, which is precisely why relying on a established data provider is necessary rather than attempting it independently. He stresses the broader point that any single metric (including days-on-market) shouldn't be evaluated in isolation, since combining many metrics into a single composite score (rather than manually assessing each one) avoids the risk of investors over-restricting their own shortlist based on a narrow, individually-applied threshold (for example, dismissing a suburb over an outdated crime statistic or a single socioeconomic data point) rather than trusting a properly weighted overall assessment.

Question 4: How do I know how much growth is left in an already-hot market like Perth or Townsville?

A listener notes they've heard Jeremy's advice to favour hot markets over undervalued cooler ones, but asks how to judge whether a market that's already grown substantially (citing Perth and Townsville as examples) still has meaningful growth left, versus looking elsewhere.

Jeremy explains there's no fixed growth duration that applies universally, some markets surge for as little as 18 months, others sustain growth for five or more years, so rather than trying to predict how long a hot market's run will last, the more reliable approach is to keep checking whether demand still exceeds supply in that market. If it does, further growth remains likely regardless of how much growth has already occurred, though he acknowledges that, generally speaking, the more growth that has already occurred, the less likely further strong growth becomes.

His practical suggestion: define a budget range, then check how many suburbs within that range currently meet strong DSR criteria in the markets under consideration, rather than assuming a single "perfect" suburb needs to be found. He also cautions against splitting a moderate budget (for example, $700,000) across two lower-priced markets (for example, two $350,000 purchases) purely for diversification, since finding two genuinely attractive markets at that lower price point may be difficult, and being fully invested in one solid opportunity is often preferable to being under-invested while searching for a second. A larger budget (for example, $1 million split across two ~$500,000 properties) makes this kind of split more practical.

On the direct question of entering a market late in its cycle versus a cooler, earlier-stage one, Jeremy would still favour capturing the "trailing end" of a hot market's growth over waiting years in a cooler market with no growth in the meantime, while also suggesting that among several viable hot markets, leaning toward one still building momentum (rather than one that's already had its major run) can be a reasonable way to balance the two considerations. He also notes that markets like Perth and Townsville are often especially attractive to yield-focused investors, and suggests investors who don't specifically need that yield might consider whether other markets could offer a comparably strong (or better) capital growth outlook without the same level of competition.

Question 5: What's your opinion on mixed-use zoned properties as a gateway into commercial property?

Jeremy is direct that he has no specific expertise in commercial property or mixed-use zoning, and doesn't offer a view on it for that reason, comparing it to consulting someone with two decades of dedicated experience in commercial property rather than someone (himself) who has spent that time focused on residential.

Damien adds that in his prior experience, some clients have looked at commercial property specifically for its cash flow characteristics, but notes that a new commercial purchase can come with a purchase premium, and cash flow benefits don't necessarily translate to the kind of capital growth more typically associated with residential property. Neither host claims a strong view either way, given it falls outside their core area of focus and available data.

Question 6: Could you do an episode reviewing the historical performance of suburbs that previously had the highest DSR scores?

A listener suggests comparing the performance of suburbs that had the highest DSR scores one, two, or three years ago against the rest of the market since, to evaluate the tool's track record directly.

Jeremy confirms this kind of analysis has been done before and exists in an earlier form on the DSR Data website, though acknowledges it's now out of date and would need to be re-recorded with updated results, since new data becomes available every year. He agrees it's a fair and important question, one that speaks directly to validating whether the approach genuinely works, and confirms a properly updated version is planned, though not something the team wants to rush without ensuring accuracy first.

Closing Thoughts

Damien and Jeremy close by inviting listeners to keep sending in questions via the comments section or email, and encourage likes, subscriptions, and shares for anyone who might benefit from future Q&A episodes.