Apartments · Mixed-use · Affordable and workforce housing
Multifamily Feasibility Study Consultants for Every Capital Source
Feasibility and market studies for HUD, LIHTC, USDA, agency, bank and SBA mixed-use financing
SBA Feasibility Study LLC is an independent multifamily feasibility study consultant to lenders, developers, tax credit applicants and investors. Apartment buildings are not eligible for SBA financing, so the firm’s multifamily work follows the capital source:
- HUD/FHA;
- LIHTC and state housing finance agencies;
- USDA rural rental housing;
- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;
- banks, life companies and debt funds;
- SBA mixed-use buildings, where an operating business occupies the required share.
Each study is built to the standard of the program that will read it: rents developed independently from comparables, demand measured as income-qualified renter households, lease-up and pipeline taken from local evidence, and coverage tested at 2026 debt costs.
By David Jones, MAI, CCIM, Principal · Last reviewed October 26, 2026 · Program rules current to October 2026
4,300+
feasibility studies by the principal
MAI · CCIM
credentials of the signatory
12
capital sources mapped to their study rules
2026
HUD, LIHTC and USDA rule changes applied
1 business day
fixed-fee proposal
On this page
What a multifamily feasibility study consultant does
A multifamily feasibility study consultant tests, independently of the sponsor, whether a proposed, acquired or rehabilitated apartment project can lease, hold and price its units well enough to support the proposed debt and equity. The study:
- names the capital source and its standard;
- defines the primary market area;
- develops rents independently from comparables, and applies program rent limits and rent regulation;
- measures demand as income-, size- and age-qualified renter households, with capture and penetration rates;
- inventories competing supply and pipeline by name;
- estimates lease-up from local evidence;
- reports coverage through lease-up and at refinance under 2026 debt costs.
It closes with a determination addressed to the lender or agency.
The determination
Feasible
The project meets the lender or program coverage standard in the base case and remains serviceable under the stated downside.
The determination
Feasible subject to stated conditions
The credit works only if named conditions hold, such as a lower loan amount, a revised unit mix, an interest reserve sized to lease-up, or rents at the program limit.
The determination
Not feasible as proposed
The evidence does not support the debt and equity as structured. The study states what would have to change.
Multifamily study requirements by capital source
Exhibit 1
Which study does your apartment deal need?
A market study is a rule only for HUD 221(d)(4), LIHTC and USDA rural rental housing. For agency, bank, life-company and debt-fund loans it is customary, and the lender’s credit policy sets the standard. For SBA it is discretionary, and apartments are not eligible at all.
| Capital source | Study required? | Governing standard | Who prepares it | Key 2026 thresholds | Citation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBA mixed-use | Discretionary (“SBA may require”) | 13 CFR 120.160(b); SOP 50 10 8 / 8.1 | Independent third party acceptable to lender and SBA | 51/49 existing; 60/20 new construction; resident space ≤49% if essential; 7(a) acquisitions 1.25x; 504 1.15:1 | 13 CFR 120.131, 120.160(b) |
| HUD 221(d)(4) | Rule | MAP Guide (2020) Ch. 7, §7.5; EMAD review | Third-party market analyst engaged through the MAP lender; rents developed independently of the appraiser | 87% / 1.15x market rate; 90% / 1.11x affordable with rent advantage; study valid 120 days from pre-application, 180 days from firm commitment | ML 2025-03; MAP Guide §7.5.2 |
| HUD 223(f) | Appraisal-led for stabilized assets | MAP Guide Ch. 7 | MAP appraiser | 87% / 1.15x; 90% / 1.11x | ML 2025-03 |
| LIHTC 9% | Rule | IRC §42(m)(1)(A)(iii); state QAP; NCHMA definitions by reference | Disinterested third-party analyst meeting the HFA’s rules (e.g., Texas 10 TAC §11.303(c)) | Texas capture rate ≤10% | TDHCA QAP |
| LIHTC 4% bond | Rule (issuer/HFA) | QAP and issuer rules; 25% bond test from 2026 | As 9% | Texas 15% large-metro bond allowance proposed for removal in the 2027 draft | P.L. 119-21; TAAHP |
| USDA Section 515 | Rule | 7 CFR 3560 | Market evidence acceptable to Rural Development | Direct loan program; FY2026 funding $50 million | 7 CFR 3560; NCSHA |
| USDA Section 538 | Rule (lender-submitted) | 7 CFR 3565; HB-1-3565 | Lender-engaged third-party analyst | LTC ≤80% (Option 3); DSCR 1.11 pilot; tenant income ≤115% AMI | 91 FR 60930 |
| Fannie Mae | Customary | DUS Guide; appraisal market analysis | Appraiser or lender | $88B 2026 cap; ≥50% mission-driven | FHFA |
| Freddie Mac | Customary | Optigo Guide | Appraiser or lender | As Fannie Mae | FHFA |
| Bank construction | Customary (credit policy) | Bank policy; FIRREA appraisal; HVCRE | Bank-engaged consultant | 150% risk weight on HVCRE loans unless exempt | 12 CFR 3.2 |
| Life company | Customary (appraisal-led) | Internal | Appraiser | — | — |
| Debt fund | Customary or none | Internal | Appraiser or consultant | CRE CLO multifamily delinquency 3.88% (September 2026) | Trepp |
Cite this
SBA Feasibility Study LLC, Multifamily study requirements by capital source, 2026. Licensed CC BY 4.0.
How to choose a multifamily feasibility study consultant
A lender or agency reads a multifamily study to decide whether it can rely on it. Seven tests separate a study that survives review from one that comes back with questions. They apply to any consultant, including this firm, and mirror our guide on how to choose a feasibility consultant and the three-pillar feasibility methodology. See the case study library for completed engagements.
Test 1
The program standard is named in the engagement letter.
The letter names the MAP Guide section, the QAP year and agency, HB-1-3565, or the lender’s credit policy. A study written for one program is not automatically accepted by another.
Test 2
The analyst meets the program’s preparer rules.
HUD: rents developed independently of the appraiser. LIHTC: a disinterested third party meeting the HFA’s rules. HFAs that require it: NCHMA peer review. Where an allocating agency or HUD requires a study from a listed, peer-reviewed or MAP-lender-engaged analyst, the firm prepares the sponsor’s or lender’s independent feasibility analysis, and its engagement letter states whether the firm meets that program’s preparer requirements.
Test 3
Rents are built from comparables, with adjustments documented.
Rents are shown per unit and per square foot. LIHTC rent limits, Fair Market Rents and local rent regulation are applied where they bind.
Test 4
Demand is measured, not asserted.
Income-, size- and age-qualified renter households are counted, and capture and penetration rates are stated against the allocating agency’s thresholds.
Test 5
Supply and lease-up come from local evidence.
The pipeline is named, lease-up comparables are documented, and the provider and measurement basis for every vacancy and rent figure is disclosed.
Test 6
Coverage is shown through lease-up and at refinance.
DSCR is tested against the program threshold: HUD 1.15x or 1.11x; USDA 538 1.11 pilot; otherwise lender policy. A refinance test is run at current debt costs.
Test 7
The consultant is willing to say no.
The published record includes findings of not feasible, or feasible only with conditions.
| Questions to ask before you sign | How this firm answers |
|---|---|
| Which program standard will the study be written to? | Named in the engagement letter. |
| Does the analyst meet that program’s preparer requirements? | The engagement letter states whether the firm meets that program’s preparer requirements. |
| How will rents be developed? | Independently from adjusted comparables, with program limits applied. |
| How will demand be measured? | Income-qualified renter households, with capture and penetration. |
| Which vacancy and rent series will be used? | One provider per series, basis disclosed, never spliced. |
| What happens after delivery? | Support through lender or agency review. |
Written proposal with a firm fixed fee within one business day.
Request a fixed-fee quoteWho prepares your multifamily feasibility study
Every study is prepared under and signed by David Jones, MAI, CCIM, Principal of SBA Feasibility Study LLC, who has completed more than 4,300 feasibility studies over his career. Every report identifies the analyst and the reviewer. The firm does not white-label its work, and it issues no unsigned drafts that later become the basis for a credit decision. The firm’s studies have been accepted by 534 SBA 7(a) lenders and 107 Certified Development Companies across 50 states.
The firm is not a lender, broker, developer, syndicator or property manager.
Where an allocating agency or HUD requires a study from a listed, peer-reviewed or MAP-lender-engaged analyst, the firm prepares the sponsor’s or lender’s independent feasibility analysis, and its engagement letter states whether the firm meets that program’s preparer requirements.
Determinations are the firm’s independent findings. Credit, award and eligibility decisions rest with the lender, the agency and SBA.
Multifamily study requirements, program by program
HUD/FHA 221(d)(4) and 223(f): the HUD 221(d)(4) market study
Section 221(d)(4) requires a third-party market study under MAP Guide Chapter 7, Section 7.5, with rents developed independently of the appraiser. The MAP Guide is the 2020 edition, amended by Mortgagee Letters.
- The analyst evaluates rents independently, and HUD compares them with the appraiser’s.
- A balanced market is taken as 5 percent vacancy.
- For new construction, HUD’s appraisal and market analysis staff (EMAD) review the study.
- The study’s effective date is the site inspection or completion of competitive research. It remains valid for 120 days from pre-application and 180 days from firm commitment.
A February 26, 2026 HUD drafting-table Mortgagee Letter proposes changes to these dating rules and to EMAD review. It remains a draft. Where an allocating agency or HUD requires a study from a listed, peer-reviewed or MAP-lender-engaged analyst, the firm prepares the sponsor’s or lender’s independent feasibility analysis, and its engagement letter states whether the firm meets that program’s preparer requirements.
Exhibit 2
HUD/FHA multifamily parameters, 2025–2026
HUD loosened leverage in 2025 and cut mortgage insurance to 25 basis points for applications from October 2025. Studies built on earlier parameters understate supportable proceeds.
| Parameter | Current | Previous | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market-rate 221(d)(4) and 223(f) | 87% LTC/LTV at 1.15x | 85% at 1.176x | ML 2025-03 (January 8, 2025) |
| Affordable with rent advantage | 90% at 1.11x | 87% at 1.15x | ML 2025-03 |
| Rental assistance and middle-income 221(d)(4) | 90% at 1.11x | — | ML 2025-02 (January 8, 2025) |
| Mortgage insurance premium | 25 bp upfront and annual for all FHA multifamily programs, on applications submitted or amended on or after October 1, 2025 | Up to 70 bp for Section 207 new construction | HUD notice FR-6522-N-02 (September 23, 2025) |
| Environmental review | MAP Guide §9.6.19.B replaced; standalone railroad-vibration review removed | — | ML 2026-04 (May 4, 2026) |
LIHTC 9% and 4%: the LIHTC market study
Section 42 requires a market study for every tax credit allocation (IRC §42(m)(1)(A)(iii)), and each state’s Qualified Allocation Plan sets the preparer rules and thresholds. Where an allocating agency or HUD requires a study from a listed, peer-reviewed or MAP-lender-engaged analyst, the firm prepares the sponsor’s or lender’s independent feasibility analysis, and its engagement letter states whether the firm meets that program’s preparer requirements.
- Capture rate (NCHMA): the share of age-, size- and income-qualified renter households in the primary market area that the property must capture to fill its units.
- Penetration rate: the share that all existing and proposed comparable properties must capture.
- In NCHMA’s own words, “a low capture or penetration rate does not automatically equate to demand,” so absorption is related to the market’s history of adding and filling units.
- Texas applies a 10 percent capture-rate threshold under 10 TAC §11.303. Its 2027 draft QAP would remove the 15 percent allowance for bond deals in high-occupancy large metros.
Exhibit 3
LIHTC in 2026
2026 carries the largest permanent expansion of the 9% credit in decades and a lower bond test. More deals will reach the market-study gate, and capture-rate thresholds still bind.
| Item | 2026 rule or figure | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 9% allocations | Permanently increased 12% starting in 2026 | P.L. 119-21, July 4, 2025 |
| 2026 per-state ceiling | Greater of $3.416 × state population or $3,953,600 | IRS Rev. Proc. 2025-32 §4.08, as corrected; Novogradac, December 2025 |
| 4% bond test | Lowered permanently from 50% to 25% for buildings placed in service after December 31, 2025, where at least 5% of aggregate basis is financed with bonds issued after that date | P.L. 119-21 |
| National 2026 volume | 9% LIHTC $1.20 billion (+14.4%); private activity bond pool $50.4 billion | Novogradac |
| Rent limits | Gross rent ≤30% of the applicable income limit, imputed at 1.5 persons per bedroom (1 person for studios), using HUD Multifamily Tax Subsidy Project income limits; utility allowance included | IRC §42(g) |
Capture, penetration and absorption (NCHMA definitions)
- Allocating agencies define capture differently; some include unstabilized comparable units in the numerator. The study applies the agency’s own formula and current QAP.
- Lease-up pace is an input from local comparables, not a national standard.
USDA rural rental housing: the USDA 538 market study
USDA finances rural rental housing through Section 515 direct loans (7 CFR 3560) and Section 538 guarantees (7 CFR 3565). Both require market evidence acceptable to Rural Development. USDA Business & Industry guarantees do not finance apartments: 7 CFR 5001.118(a) excludes “apartments, duplexes, or other residential housing where the primary purpose is independent housing.”
Exhibit 4
USDA rural rental housing: what changed in 2026
Section 538 underwriting loosened materially in September 2026. Higher leverage, a 1.11 coverage pilot and lower Opportunity Zone fees make rural workforce and affordable projects that failed in 2025 worth re-testing.
| Item | Rule or figure | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Section 538 Option 3 LTC | Raised from 70% to 80% of total development cost | 91 FR 60930 (September 25, 2026) |
| Section 538 DSCR pilot | 1.11 for the first 200 loans closed, October 9, 2026 to September 25, 2028 | 91 FR 60930 |
| Pilot terms | Developer fee capped at 15% of total development cost when not funded by LIHTC or government sources; risk-tiered underwriting; HUD capital needs assessments and environmental reports may be accepted | 91 FR 60930 |
| Section 538 fees | Revised effective September 30, 2026; Opportunity Zone projects pay 60 bp initial and 25 bp annual | Federal Register (September 30, 2026) |
| Section 515 portfolio | 12,014 properties and 379,894 units remain. 621 properties and 14,928 units left between June 2021 and March 2026, nearly 5% of properties. | Housing Assistance Council (2026) |
| FY2026 funding | Section 515 $50 million; Multifamily Preservation and Revitalization (MPR) $30 million; rental-assistance decoupling for up to 5,000 units | NCSHA (November 2025) |
| Preservation | Preservation Pilot for 515 transfers; Simple Transfer Pilot extended | 91 FR 60930; 91 FR 18275 |
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
FHFA set 2026 multifamily purchase caps of $88 billion for each Enterprise, $176 billion combined and up 20.5 percent. At least 50 percent must be mission-driven, and workforce housing is excluded from the cap (FHFA, November 24, 2025). Agency loans are appraisal-led; a third-party market study is customary where lease-up or market depth is in question. Fannie Mae’s Q2 2026 acquisitions carried an average original LTV of 63 percent and DSCR of 1.9x.
Banks, life companies and debt funds
- High-volatility commercial real estate loans carry a 150 percent risk weight unless exempt (12 CFR 3.2).
- The 2006 interagency guidance flags construction concentrations at or above 100 percent of capital, and total commercial real estate concentrations at or above 300 percent of capital with 50 percent growth over 36 months.
- Bank construction and development loans ran 0.99 percent noncurrent at Q2 2026 (FDIC).
- The study is a credit-policy requirement rather than a regulatory one, and it is written to the lender’s own underwriting. See the lender resources.
SBA and multifamily: what SBA can and cannot finance
Apartment buildings are not eligible for SBA 7(a) or 504 financing. SBA’s SOP states that “Apartment buildings and mobile home parks are not eligible” (SOP 50 10 8, Section A, Chapter 1, Paragraph E.3), under the passive-business rule at 13 CFR 120.110(c). No management structure changes that, because the revenue is still residential rent. Our SBA feasibility study NAICS requirement map shows which codes trigger a study, and the October 2026 SBA feasibility monitor tracks the SOP 50 10 8.1 carry-forward language.
SBA can finance a building with apartments in it when an eligible operating business occupies the required share of a mixed-use building:
- Existing building: at least 51 percent occupied, up to 49 percent leased.
- New construction: at least 60 percent occupied and up to 20 percent permanently leased, with the business planning to occupy some of the remainder within three years and all of it within ten (13 CFR 120.131).
- Apartments count as leased space “regardless of whether the Rentable Property is leased to a commercial or residential tenant.”
- Where the business requires a resident owner or manager, residential space essential to the business may be financed up to 49 percent of the property.
For those files, the study proves two things: that the building meets SBA’s occupancy test, and that the operating business, not the apartment rent, repays the loan, using the financial projection and DSCR methodology and site and regulatory assessment applied to every SBA file. Licensed care follows its own path, covered in our assisted living feasibility study guide. Lodging is the separate path: hotels and RV parks and campgrounds qualify on the transient-revenue test. The Leander limited-service hotel case study and Fredericksburg RV resort case study show how those files are underwritten, and the US hotel market report and RV park lending outlook cover current market conditions. For the full program choice, compare the SBA 7(a) vs 504 feasibility requirements and the CDC guide for 504 projects.
Exhibit 5
SBA residential eligibility map
SBA’s residential line is not about who manages the building but about what produces the revenue. An operating business that owns residential space can qualify; a landlord cannot.
| Use | SBA status | Rule |
|---|---|---|
| Apartment buildings and mobile home parks | Not eligible | SOP 50 10 8, Sec. A, Ch. 1, Para. E.3; 13 CFR 120.110(c) |
| Mixed-use with an operating business occupying the required share | Eligible | 13 CFR 120.131 |
| Resident owner or manager space | Eligible if essential, sized to need, ≤49% | SOP 50 10 8, Sec. A, Ch. 3, Para. C.1 |
| Licensed assisted living, memory care, nursing and residential care with health services | Eligible | SOP 50 10 8, Para. E.3 |
| Independent living and senior apartments without licensed care | Not eligible | SOP 50 10 8, Para. E.3 (unlicensed residential facilities) |
| Hotels, motels, extended-stay, RV parks, campgrounds, marinas | Eligible if >50% of prior-year revenue is from stays of 30 days or less (start-ups by projection) | SOP 50 10 8, Para. E.3 |
| Short-term rentals | Tested under the transient rule; portfolios leased to third parties risk passive treatment | SOP 50 10 8 |
| Boarding and rooming houses | Not eligible unless >50% of revenue is from stays of 30 days or less | SOP 50 10 8 |
| Student housing | Not eligible (long-term residential leasing) | 13 CFR 120.110(c) |
| Employer-owned workforce housing | Not eligible as a standalone rental; allowed only as essential resident space within 49% | SOP 50 10 8 |
| Build-to-rent single-family | Not eligible (real estate held for lease) | 13 CFR 120.130 |
SBA mixed-use occupancy test (13 CFR 120.131)
The same building that passes as an existing acquisition fails as new construction.
Illustrative screening only. Rentable property is measured consistently with the SOP, and eligibility is confirmed by the lender and SBA.
Exhibit 6
The SBA record for residential lessors (NAICS 531110)
SBA lenders recorded 332 loans under the residential-lessor code in sixteen years, less than 2 percent of the hotel count and only 2 since FY2024. The data confirm the rule rather than a lending channel.
332
loans disbursed, FY2010–FY2026
$183.7M
approved volume
$553,000
average loan
95.8%
7(a) share of loans
4.3% vs 7.3%
seasoned adverse resolution vs all industries
| Metric | Value | Cohort or period |
|---|---|---|
| Loans disbursed | 332 loans | FY2010–FY2026 |
| Approved volume | $183.7 million | FY2010–FY2026 |
| Average loan | $553,000 | FY2010–FY2026 |
| 7(a) share | 95.8% of loans | FY2010–FY2026 |
| Approvals in FY2024 or later | 2 loans | FY2024–FY2026 |
| Seasoned loans | 282 loans | FY2010–FY2021 approvals |
| Seasoned adverse resolution | 4.3% (all industries 7.3%) | FY2010–FY2021 approvals |
| SBA hotel loans, same period | 17,815 loans; residential-lessor count less than 2% of it (firm arithmetic) | FY2010–FY2026 |
Top five states by loan count
The 332 loans in this data block are coded to NAICS 531110, residential-building lessors, and they are not a record of SBA apartment lending. That code also covers residential and retirement hotels, cottage rentals and on-site manufactured home rentals, and lenders assign it themselves. Read the 4.3% adverse-resolution rate against 7.3% for all industries as a property of this coding bucket, not as a benchmark for a new mixed-use file. A residential-lessor code on a new application is a classification question to resolve in the file before underwriting starts.
SBA program limits and coverage
| Item | Rule | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 7(a) maximum | $5,000,000; aggregate guaranty $3,750,000 | 13 CFR 120.151 |
| 504 project maximum | Up to $5.5 million | SBA lender page |
| Combined 7(a) and 504 | Up to $5M in 7(a) plus $5M in 504 ($10M) when the 7(a) loan is approved first, for loans numbered on or after July 4, 2026 | SBA Policy Notice 5000-879058; SBA News Release 26-52 (May 18, 2026) |
| 7(a) change of ownership (SOP 50 10 8.1, Appendix 15) | 1.25x for Initial Acquisitions, Owner Buyouts and ESOPs; 1.15x for Business Expansions; measured on the last fiscal year or a two-year average; projections excluded. 10% injection non-waivable for Initial Acquisitions only. Lender-ordered QoE at a purchase price of $3M or more. | Womble Bond Dickinson; FunderIntel (2026) |
| 504 coverage | 1.15:1 minimum (EBITDA over combined post-504 debt service), per CDC summaries of SOP 50 10 8.1 | CDC summaries of SOP 50 10 8.1 (October 2026) |
| Feasibility study | Not required by rule; SBA may require one under 13 CFR 120.160(b), and lenders and CDCs commonly order one for start-ups and new construction | 13 CFR 120.160(b) |
Test coverage with the DSCR calculator and read the DSCR guide for SBA loans, SBA 504 feasibility study and SBA 7(a) feasibility study pages.
Opportunity Zones
P.L. 119-21 made the Opportunity Zone incentive permanent. Reports describe rolling ten-year designations beginning January 1, 2027 and enhanced rural incentives; the study confirms designation status for the subject tract at the time of the engagement.
What a multifamily feasibility study consultant analyzes
An apartment feasibility study is built in the order a credit officer reads it: rents, demand, absorption, unit mix, expenses, refinance, value and regulation.
Rent comparable analysis
We construct rent comps from multiple sources and cross-reference the results. CoStar provides property-level rent and occupancy data for institutional-quality properties. Listing platforms such as Zillow provide broader coverage of smaller properties, and HUD Fair Market Rents and state housing agency rent limits anchor any rent-restricted units. Apartments.com and direct competitor websites provide current asking rents. For workforce housing in secondary markets where database coverage is thin, we supplement with direct phone surveys and on-site visits to competing properties.
The comp set typically includes 5 to 10 properties that match the subject on key dimensions: unit count (within 25% to 50% of the subject), age and condition, unit mix, amenity level, and submarket location. Including a 300-unit Class A luxury complex in the comp set for a 40-unit workforce housing project produces meaningless benchmarks.
We analyze rents on both a per-unit and per-square-foot basis. A 900 sq ft two-bedroom renting for $1,400 per month ($1.56 per sq ft) is a different value proposition than a 1,200 sq ft two-bedroom at the same $1,400 ($1.17 per sq ft). Tenants respond to total rent, but lenders evaluate per-square-foot efficiency.
Demand: income-qualified renter households
Demand begins with renter households in the primary market area that qualify by income, household size and, where relevant, age, adjusted for tenure and turnover. The study states the capture rate for the subject and the penetration rate for the subject plus all comparable existing and pipeline units, and compares both with the allocating agency’s thresholds where one applies. See the market analysis methodology.
Absorption and lease-up
Firm planning ranges for lease-up
| Project type | Absorption rate | Time to stabilization | DSCR implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| New construction (strong market) | 8 to 15 units per month | 6 to 12 months | DSCR may be below 1.0x for the first 3 to 6 months; reaches target by month 9 to 12 |
| New construction (moderate market) | 4 to 8 units per month | 12 to 18 months | Extended sub-breakeven period; borrower needs reserves for 6 to 12 months of negative cash flow |
| New construction (soft market) | 2 to 4 units per month | 18 to 30 months | High risk; DSCR may not reach the lender’s minimum within its underwriting horizon |
| Acquisition of stabilized property | N/A (already leased) | Immediate | DSCR calculated from in-place rents with adjustments for market repositioning |
| Value-add renovation | Re-lease at 3 to 8 units per month post-renovation | 6 to 12 months after completion | Temporary vacancy during renovation; phased approach reduces cash flow disruption |
No published national lease-up standard exists. Each study replaces these ranges with the absorption recorded by recently completed comparable projects in the subject’s market.
We derive the absorption rate from the submarket’s historical absorption of comparable new supply, the current vacancy rate in the comp set, and the subject’s competitive positioning. National context as of mid-2026: CBRE’s Q2 2026 multifamily figures put vacancy at 4.3%, net absorption at 167,000 units and completions at 77,700 units, down 14% from a year earlier, with average rent of $2,257, up 0.5% year over year (CBRE’s press release gives absorption as 167,500; other providers report different levels on different bases; see Exhibit 7). CBRE’s Midyear Review 2026 forecasts 1.4% rent growth and 4.9% vacancy for the year. A projection that grows apartment rent faster than that needs a sourced local reason.
Unit mix
Firm planning ranges for unit mix
| Unit type | Share of mix | Average sq ft | Relative rent per sq ft | Target demographic | Absorption speed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studio | 5% to 15% | 400–550 | Highest | Young professionals, students | Fast in urban; slow in suburban |
| 1 BR / 1 BA | 30% to 45% | 600–800 | High | Singles, young couples, downsizers | Fastest overall absorption |
| 2 BR / 1–2 BA | 30% to 40% | 850–1,100 | Moderate | Couples, roommates, small families | Strong and consistent |
| 3 BR / 2 BA | 5% to 15% | 1,100–1,400 | Lowest | Families, rent-by-choice households | Slower; narrower tenant pool |
The study supports the proposed mix from the demand analysis by household size, models revenue under the proposed mix and tests alternative configurations to identify whether a different allocation would produce a stronger DSCR.
Operating expense benchmarking
NAA’s operating benchmarks are now published through Income/Expense IQ, with IREM and BOMA. The 2024 report covered 4,666 conventional properties with 1,089,259 units in 109 metropolitan markets, and its same-store panel put total operating expenses at $8,657 per unit, up 2.2% from 2023. IREM’s full-sample national summary for 2024 puts total operating expenses at $7,981 per unit; the same-store panel and the full sample are not interchangeable. Insurance is the line that moves most: Trepp found multifamily property insurance up 58% over five years, even though median growth slowed to 2.7% in 2025.
Firm planning ranges by expense line
| Expense category | Range (% of gross revenue) | Key variables |
|---|---|---|
| Property management | 5% to 10% | Self-managed (lower) vs third-party (higher); economies of scale above 100 units |
| Payroll (on-site staff) | 8% to 15% | Unit count, amenity level, local wage rates |
| Maintenance and repairs | 5% to 10% | Property age, climate, construction quality, deferred maintenance |
| Utilities (owner-paid) | 4% to 8% | Submetered vs master-metered, climate zone, energy efficiency |
| Property taxes | 8% to 15% | Jurisdiction, assessment methodology, abatement programs |
| Insurance | 2% to 5% | Location, construction type, claims history |
| Marketing and leasing | 1% to 3% | Market vacancy, turnover, competitive intensity |
| Administrative and legal | 1% to 3% | Eviction costs, compliance, accounting, technology |
| Capital reserves (replacement) | 2% to 4% | Property age, remaining useful life of major systems, lender requirements |
| Total operating expense ratio | 38% to 55% | Newer and larger = lower ratio; older and smaller = higher ratio |
The study computes the ratio from Income/Expense IQ data for the subject’s metro and product, the seller’s trailing twelve months, the current tax bill and an insurance quote. National I/E IQ lines are in Exhibit 10; see also financial projections and DSCR methodology.
Refinance and debt-cost test
At a 10-year Treasury near 4.6 percent and apartment cap rates of 5.4 to 5.8 percent, the spread is roughly 80 to 120 basis points, too thin for positive leverage on most agency debt. About 17 percent of the $5.0 trillion of outstanding commercial mortgages, $875 billion, matures in 2026, including about 13 percent of multifamily balances (MBA, February 2026). The study tests coverage at today’s rates and at refinance, not only at stabilization. See the SBA cost of capital index.
Cap rate analysis
Cap rate analysis provides a market-derived check on value relative to the purchase price or construction cost, and it informs the exit valuation. CBRE’s H1 2026 U.S. Cap Rate Survey found cap rates essentially flat in the first half of the year, with infill multifamily the most bearish property subtype. MSCI data compiled by RealPage put the Q2 2026 average apartment cap rate at 5.79 percent, an eleven-year high, and the trailing top-150-market series at 5.4 percent. Garden assets traded at $164,777 per unit, against $288,335 for mid- and high-rise, about 75 percent more. Survey ranges are professional estimates, not closed sales, so the study relies on closed submarket transactions first. Test figures with the cap rate calculator.
Rent regulation
Rent regulation caps the revenue model; see Exhibit 12. Washington and Oregon set 2027 caps at their 10 percent ceilings, California’s cap is 8.8 percent in the San Francisco–Oakland–Hayward region (including Contra Costa) through July 31, 2027, and New York City froze stabilized rents for leases starting October 1, 2026 through September 30, 2027.
2026 multifamily market evidence
Every figure carries its provider, measurement basis and period. The firm updates this section when a primary release changes the answer. Together these exhibits form the national context of every multifamily market study the firm issues, sourced under our data methodology and benchmarked against SBA loan default rates by industry and loss severity by property type.
Exhibit 7
Which vacancy number? Four providers, four answers
Every provider shows the same direction, improvement in 2026, but their levels are not interchangeable. A study uses one provider per series, states its basis and never splices series.
| Provider | Universe | Vacancy or occupancy | Rent and growth | Basis | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBRE | 69 markets | 4.3% vacancy (Q2 2026) | $2,257, +0.5% YoY | Average rent | July 29, 2026 |
| RealPage | Conventional professionally managed | 95.4% occupancy (Q3 2026) | $1,915, +0.9% YoY | Same-store effective rent, net of concessions | October 6, 2026 |
| Yardi Matrix | 50+ units, 140 markets | 94.3% stabilized; 93.9% total incl. lease-up (August 2026) | $1,775, +0.7% YoY (September) | Advertised rent | October 2026 |
| Cushman & Wakefield | All properties incl. lease-up | 8.6% vacancy (Q3 2026) | $1,950, +2.3% YoY | Asking rent | October 2026 |
| Census HVS | All rental housing | 7.3% rental vacancy (Q2 2026) | — | Household survey | July 28, 2026 |
RealPage reports 22.7 percent of units offering concessions in Q3 2026, at an average 7.5 percent discount. That is roughly four weeks free on a twelve-month lease (firm arithmetic).
Exhibit 8
The supply turn
Completions have fallen almost by half from the 2024 peak, and 2026 starts are a quarter below 2025, so supply relief is real and front-loaded into 2027. The Sun Belt metros that built most are still cutting rents.
| Indicator | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Completion peak | Nearly 588,000 units, annual, late 2024 | RealPage |
| Completions, year to Q3 2026 | Nearly 318,000, about 46% below peak | RealPage, October 6, 2026 |
| Absorption, year to Q3 2026 | About 304,800 units; demand-supply gap 13,000, narrowest since late 2015 | RealPage |
| Census 5+ starts | 349,000 SAAR, −25.9% YoY (September 2026) | Census NRC, October 20, 2026 |
| Census 5+ completions / under construction / permits | 339,000 SAAR / 677,000 (−3.1% YoY) / 503,000 SAAR (+1.0% YoY) | Census NRC, October 20, 2026 |
| Forward deliveries | About 312,000–320,000 over the next four quarters | RealPage 2Q26 and 3Q26 outlooks |
| 2026 forecasts | CBRE: rent +1.4%, vacancy 4.9%. CoStar: vacancy 8.2% at end-2026, Q4 rent +1.9%. RealPage: +2.4% effective rent, Q4 2026–Q3 2027 (as reported). | CBRE (August 4, 2026); CoStar (August 12, 2026); RealPage (October 2026) |
| Metro split | San Francisco +14.3% (RealPage, Q3) vs Austin −2.5%, Phoenix −2.1%, Houston −2.0%, Denver −1.6% (Yardi Matrix, September 2026) | RealPage; Yardi Matrix |
Exhibit 9
The cost side is moving faster than rents
Construction costs are rising 4 to 10 percent a year while rents rise 0.5 to 2.3 percent. New-construction feasibility now turns on the budget as much as on demand.
| Indicator | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| RLB national construction cost index | +4.45% YoY, the largest quarterly rise in two years | RLB Q3 2026 (July 2026 data) |
| Inputs to residential construction | +10.3% YoY (September 2026); softwood plywood +15.9%; building materials ex-energy +5.5% | NAHB analysis of BLS PPI, October 15, 2026 |
| Tariffs | Steel and aluminum 50% from June 4, 2025 (Proclamation 10947); Canadian lumber duties about 35% plus 10% Section 232 | White House; NAHB |
| Labor | 47% of builders report trade-labor shortages (September 2026 HMI); 33% of contractors affected by immigration enforcement | NAHB, October 14, 2026; AGC–Sage, January 8, 2026 |
| Multifamily hard cost by metro, $/sf of gross floor area (garden to high-rise) | Dallas 195–285; Austin 190–285; Phoenix 205–305; Nashville 220–385; Charlotte 220–375; Denver 225–415; Chicago 235–505; New York 260–510; Seattle 295–505; San Francisco 420–700 | RLB Q3 2026 |
Exhibit 10
Operating expenses and insurance
Expenses still outgrow revenue: median 2025 NOI rose 1.8 percent against 3.7 percent expense growth. A study states which I/E IQ sample it benchmarks against, because the same-store and full-sample totals differ by $676 per unit.
| Item | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Total operating expenses, same-store | $8,657 per unit, +2.2% vs 2023 (4,666 properties, 1,089,259 units, 109 metros) | Income/Expense IQ 2024 data (NAA, IREM, BOMA; August 2025) |
| Total operating expenses, full sample | $7,981 per unit | IREM I/E IQ National Summary 2024 |
| Administrative and payroll | $2,323 per unit, +3.8% | NAA |
| Taxes and insurance | $2,998 per unit, +2.65% | NAA (secondary summary) |
| Utilities | $1,304 per unit, −3.2% | NAA (secondary summary) |
| Repairs and maintenance | $1,098 per unit, +3.7% | NAA (secondary summary) |
| Insurance | +58% over five years; median +2.7% in 2025 (+10.9% in 2024); Florida median −6.2% in 2025; Miami +101.9% over five years | Trepp (2026) |
| 2025 operating results | Median opex +3.7%; median NOI +1.8% | Trepp |
| NYC rent-stabilized cost index | +5.3% (2026) | NYC Rent Guidelines Board |
Exhibit 11
Where multifamily credit stress sits, by channel
Multifamily CMBS delinquency now exceeds the CMBS average, while agency and bank books remain near or below 1 percent. Stress sits where floating-rate and maturing debt sit, so every study tests lease-up and refinance, not only stabilization.
| Channel | Measure | Rate | Period | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMBS (multifamily) | 30+ day delinquency | 8.04% (6.94% in January) | September 2026 | Trepp |
| CMBS (all property types) | 30+ day delinquency | 8.02% | September 2026 | Trepp |
| CMBS multifamily special servicing | Special servicing rate | 8.54% | September 2026 | Trepp |
| CRE CLO (multifamily) | Delinquency | 3.88% on $41.35 billion | September 2026 | Trepp |
| Banks (multifamily) | Noncurrent rate | 1.10% | Q2 2026 | FDIC Quarterly Banking Profile |
| Freddie Mac (multifamily) | Delinquency | 0.64% (0.48% in August 2025) | August 2026 | Freddie Mac Monthly Volume Summary |
| Fannie Mae (multifamily) | Serious delinquency | 0.57% | August 2026 | Fannie Mae |
Definitions differ by channel (30-day, 60-day and noncurrent measures), so rates are compared by order of magnitude, not point for point. For SBA-wide default patterns see the SBA Feasibility Risk Meter.
Exhibit 12
Rent regulation caps, 2026–2027
Three West Coast states now cap annual increases at or near 10 percent, and New York City froze stabilized rents for two years. A projection that grows rent faster than the controlling cap is wrong by statute, not by judgment.
| Jurisdiction | Cap | Valid for | New-construction exemption | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Washington | 10% (formula produced 11.53%; 2026 cap was 9.683%) | Calendar 2027 | Reported 12 years | WA Commerce, July 15, 2026 |
| Oregon | 10% (2026: 9.5%); 6% for manufactured-home facilities over 30 spaces | Calendar 2027 | First certificate of occupancy less than 15 years before notice | Oregon DAS, September 28, 2026 |
| California AB 1482 | Lesser of 5% + regional CPI or 10%: SF–Oakland–Hayward (incl. Contra Costa) 8.8%; LA–Orange 8.7%; San Diego 8.2%; Riverside–San Bernardino 8.1%; other counties 8.6% | August 1, 2026 – July 31, 2027 | 15-year rolling | Secondary legal sources (2026) |
| New York City (rent-stabilized, about 1 million units) | 0% one-year and 0% two-year leases, the first two-year freeze | Leases starting October 1, 2026 – September 30, 2027 | Stabilization applies to pre-1974 buildings of 6+ units and to tax-benefit buildings | NYC RGB Order #58, June 25, 2026 |
Cite this
SBA Feasibility Study LLC, U.S. rent regulation caps, 2026–2027. Licensed CC BY 4.0.
Exhibit 13
Affordability and program rents
Renter cost burden is at a record while program rents rise only 2 percent. Affordable and workforce projects are capped by program rents, not by market demand.
| Item | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Cost-burdened renter households | 22.7 million (49%), including 12.1 million severely burdened (2024) | Harvard JCHS, State of the Nation’s Housing 2026 (June 17, 2026) |
| Units renting under $1,000 (real) | Down by more than 7 million, 2014–2024 | Harvard JCHS |
| FY2027 Fair Market Rents | Effective October 1, 2026; weighted average +2.0% (non-metro +4.13%, metro +1.66%); national non-metro two-bedroom floor $1,014 | HUD, 91 FR 56156 (September 1, 2026); Novogradac |
| Homeownership rate | 65.0% | Census HVS, Q2 2026 |
Multifamily feasibility study vs market study vs appraisal
The three documents answer different questions, as our comparison of a feasibility study vs appraisal vs market study explains. Ground-up projects add new construction feasibility and environmental due diligence questions, and expense assumptions follow our operating expense rationalization standard.
| Multifamily market study | Feasibility study | Appraisal |
|---|---|---|
| Demand, comparables, capture and absorption; program-mandated for HUD, LIHTC and USDA. | The market study plus budget, financing, pro forma, coverage through lease-up and refinance, and a determination. | USPAP value opinion; for HUD, rents are compared with the market analyst’s independent conclusion. |
The market study proves the units will lease at the projected rents; the feasibility study proves the capital structure survives the lease-up; the appraisal states value. Programs that require all three expect them to reconcile.
Related: feasibility study vs business plan and the report walkthrough.
Engaging the firm: process, fee and timeline
1. Scoping call
A 15-minute call; a written proposal with a firm fixed fee follows within one business day.
2. Data request
A structured data request within one to two business days of the engagement letter.
3. Delivery and review
A mid-point findings review on substantial engagements, delivery, and support through lender or agency review.
The firm’s multifamily fee runs $4,900 to $18,000, fixed before work begins. The fee does not depend on the conclusion, the award or the closing. Delivery runs 10 to 15 business days from a complete data response. For pricing across property types, see the cost and timeline guide.
Data request checklist
- Site address and parcel.
- Unit count, mix and unit sizes.
- Site plan and amenity program.
- Development budget, or the purchase contract with T-12 and rent roll.
- Capital source and program: HUD, LIHTC 9% or 4% (with agency and QAP year), USDA 515 or 538, agency, bank or SBA mixed-use.
- Income targeting and rent restrictions by AMI band.
- Any market study, appraisal or capital needs assessment already in the file.
- For mixed-use: floor plans with square footage by use, plus the operating business’s financial statements.
Request Your Free Feasibility Study Consultation
Multifamily feasibility study FAQ
More answers: SBA feasibility study FAQ and the glossary.
Work with the firm’s multifamily feasibility study consultants
Studies are signed by David Jones, MAI, CCIM. Every multifamily project we underwrite follows the same lender ready process: independent market analysis, site and technical review, and financial projections tested against SBA SOP 50 10 8.1. Our SBA feasibility study consultants guide explains scope, timing, deliverables, and what lenders and CDCs expect in the report.
How this page is verified
Program rules are checked against 13 CFR Part 120, SBA SOP 50 10 8 and 8.1, HUD Mortgagee Letters and the MAP Guide, IRC §42 and state QAPs, 7 CFR Parts 3560, 3565 and 5001, and FHFA releases. Every market figure names its provider, basis and date. Last verified October 26, 2026.
Sources
- eCFR, 13 CFR 120.110, 120.130, 120.131, 120.151 and 120.160 (current) — https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-13/chapter-I/part-120
- eCFR, 7 CFR 5001.118 (current) — https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/part-5001
- eCFR, 12 CFR 3.2 (current) — https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-12/part-3
- U.S. Small Business Administration, SOP 50 10 8 and SOP 50 10 8.1 — https://www.sba.gov/document/sop-50-10-lender-development-company-loan-programs
- U.S. Small Business Administration, Information Notice 5000-880695 (August 14, 2026) — https://www.sba.gov/document/information-notice
- U.S. Small Business Administration, Policy Notice 5000-879058 and News Release 26-52 (May 18, 2026) — https://www.sba.gov
- HUD, Mortgagee Letters 2025-02 and 2025-03 (January 8, 2025) and 2026-04 (May 4, 2026) — https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/administration/hudclips/letters/mortgagee
- HUD, notice FR-6522-N-02, FHA multifamily mortgage insurance premiums (September 23, 2025) — https://www.federalregister.gov
- HUD, Multifamily Accelerated Processing (MAP) Guide (2020 edition) — https://www.hud.gov
- Internal Revenue Service, Rev. Proc. 2025-32 — https://www.irs.gov
- Novogradac, 2026 LIHTC ceiling and volume reporting (December 2025) — https://www.novoco.com
- Congressional Research Service, RS22389, An Introduction to the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit — https://crsreports.congress.gov
- Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, 2026 Qualified Allocation Plan and 10 TAC §11.303 — https://www.tdhca.texas.gov
- Texas Affiliation of Affordable Housing Providers (TAAHP), 2027 draft QAP commentary (2026) — https://www.taahp.org
- Federal Register, 91 FR 60930 (September 25, 2026); Section 538 fee notice (September 30, 2026); 91 FR 18275 — https://www.federalregister.gov
- Housing Assistance Council, Section 515 portfolio data (2026) — https://ruralhome.org
- National Council of State Housing Agencies (NCSHA), FY2026 appropriations summary (November 2025) — https://www.ncsha.org
- Federal Housing Finance Agency, 2026 multifamily purchase caps (November 24, 2025) — https://www.fhfa.gov
- Fannie Mae, Q2 2026 multifamily acquisitions and August 2026 credit data — https://www.fanniemae.com
- Freddie Mac, Monthly Volume Summary (August 2026) — https://www.freddiemac.com
- FDIC, Quarterly Banking Profile, Q2 2026 — https://www.fdic.gov
- Trepp, CMBS and CRE CLO delinquency reports (September and October 2026), via MBA Newslink and Multifamily Dive — https://www.trepp.com
- Mortgage Bankers Association, Commercial Real Estate Loan Maturity Survey (February 2026) — https://www.mba.org
- CBRE, Q2 2026 U.S. multifamily figures (July 29, 2026), Midyear Review 2026 (August 4, 2026) and H1 2026 Cap Rate Survey (August 12, 2026) — https://www.cbre.com
- RealPage, Q3 2026 apartment market reports (October 6, 2026) — https://www.realpage.com
- Yardi Matrix, National Multifamily Report (October 2026) — https://www.yardimatrix.com
- Cushman & Wakefield, U.S. Multifamily MarketBeat Q3 2026 (October 2026) — https://www.cushmanwakefield.com
- CoStar, multifamily forecast (August 12, 2026) — https://www.costar.com
- U.S. Census Bureau, New Residential Construction (October 20, 2026) and Housing Vacancies and Homeownership (July 28, 2026) — https://www.census.gov
- Rider Levett Bucknall, North America Quarterly Cost Report Q3 2026 — https://www.rlb.com
- NAHB, Housing Market Index (October 14, 2026) and BLS PPI analysis (October 15, 2026) — https://www.nahb.org
- AGC–Sage, construction workforce survey (January 8, 2026) — https://www.agc.org
- NAA, IREM and BOMA, Income/Expense IQ 2024 data (August 2025) — https://www.irem.org
- Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, State of the Nation’s Housing 2026 (June 17, 2026) — https://www.jchs.harvard.edu
- HUD, FY2027 Fair Market Rents, 91 FR 56156 (September 1, 2026) — https://www.huduser.gov
- Washington State Department of Commerce, 2027 rent increase cap (July 15, 2026) — https://www.commerce.wa.gov
- Oregon Department of Administrative Services, 2027 maximum rent increase (September 28, 2026) — https://www.oregon.gov/das
- NYC Rent Guidelines Board, Order #58 (June 25, 2026) — https://rentguidelinesboard.cityofnewyork.us
- U.S. Small Business Administration, 7(a) and 504 FOIA loan-level data (as of March 31, 2026) — https://data.sba.gov
Changelog
| Date | Change |
|---|---|
| October 26, 2026 | Page rebuilt as the firm’s multifamily service page across every capital source. Added the capital-source study matrix; 2025–2026 HUD, LIHTC and USDA program rules; the SBA residential eligibility map and mixed-use occupancy test; the capture-rate calculator; and provider-basis, supply, cost, expense, credit-stress, rent-regulation and affordability exhibits. Corrected the SBA combined-limit, acquisition-coverage and 504 coverage statements. Removed an unsupported claim about NAA survey history. Relabelled unsupported ranges as firm planning ranges. |