U.S. Housing Stability Intelligence
City Profile
Keeseville profile describes structural housing sustainability conditions for local residents using standardized national methodology.
Housing Stability Score
58
/100
2024 Score Edition • Higher is stronger
Score snapshot: 2024-12-30 · Method: v3-2024-refresh-explainability
Score provenance: direct local · 10/10 direct local ACS baseline inputs
Major-city ranking: not ranked until all 10 direct local baseline inputs are available.
Housing-first durability lens
Trend Direction
Declining
Trend direction compares this snapshot with the prior published score; movement within three points is treated as stable.
September 2026 Conditions Edition
Loading the published county observations.
Media Summary
Keeseville, NY has a 58 / 100 Housing Stability Score with a declining trend signal in the 2024 Score Edition (score date 2024-12-30; method v3-2024-refresh-explainability). The score is a structural housing sustainability measure, not a forecast of future prices.
Citation Language
Keeseville, NY has a 58/100 Housing Stability Score (moderate) in the 2024 Score Edition (score date 2024-12-30; method v3-2024-refresh-explainability), 58/100 national percentile, and -3 point change versus the prior published snapshot.
Housing Stability Score
58
Moderate relative housing sustainability score on a 0-100 scale in the 2024 Score Edition (score date 2024-12-30).
Full City Rank
#13,077 of 30,973
Full national coverage rank across the city index. Same-state full rank: #317 of 968.
Score Movement
-3
Point change versus the prior published score snapshot in the 2024 Score Edition.
Leading Signal
Affordability Stability
Highest component score in the four-part housing stability framework.
These drivers summarize the main score movement, strongest support, and clearest pressure point for this location.
Score Driver
The composite score declined by 3 points versus the prior published snapshot, enough to mark the trend as declining.
Component Driver
Affordability stability is the strongest component at 80 / 100, so it contributes the most support to the current housing stability score.
Component Driver
Market volatility is the main constraint at 35 / 100, so users should read that component as the clearest pressure point in this location.
Score Driver
This score uses 10 observed local inputs and 4 inherited county inputs out of 14 model inputs; 0 inputs are filled from comparable benchmarks when direct observations are unavailable.
Every location includes standardized component evaluation so cross-location comparison stays structurally consistent.
Affordability Stability
Evaluates whether housing costs align sustainably with local income over time using rent burden, price-to-income, and cost growth relative to wages.
Component Score: 80 / 100
State: 88 / 100 percentile (very strong relative stability)
National: 80 / 100 percentile (very strong relative stability)
Market Volatility
Measures housing price consistency and resistance to boom-and-bust cycles that can destabilize long-term resident outcomes.
Component Score: 35 / 100
State: 41 / 100 percentile (mid-range relative stability)
National: 35 / 100 percentile (below-average relative stability)
Supply Pressure
Tracks whether housing availability keeps pace with demand through inventory, construction pace, and local supply balance conditions.
Component Score: 60 / 100
State: 54 / 100 percentile (mid-range relative stability)
National: 60 / 100 percentile (above-average relative stability)
Ownership Sustainability
Assesses long-term ownership viability through expense escalation, tax burden pressure, insurance overlap, and distress indicators.
State Comparison
State benchmark: 68 / 100 percentile (higher is more stable), placing this location above most comparable places in this state.
National Comparison
National benchmark: 58 / 100 percentile (higher is more stable), placing this location near the middle of comparable places nationwide.
Scoring uses public, reproducible county-level datasets including ACS, BLS LAUS, FHFA HPI, and Census housing estimates, applied through the same framework across affordability stability, market volatility, supply pressure, and ownership sustainability.
2024 Score Edition • Score snapshot: 2024-12-30 • Method: v3-2024-refresh-explainability
The September 2026 conditions edition provides separate current observations. A future score edition will be published only after a complete, documented methodology refresh.
City coverage combines local city observations with county-level inherited signals when direct city series are unavailable.
Observed Local
10
Inherited Inputs
4
Imputed Inputs
0
Coverage Share
100%
Total model inputs in the published score: 14
Staten Island
61 / 100
Same-state comparison for context.
Component Score: 45 / 100
State: 59 / 100 percentile (mid-range relative stability)
National: 45 / 100 percentile (mid-range relative stability)
September 2026 Conditions Edition
These four source-backed observations are current conditions context. They do not create a new score, change a ranking, or forecast a housing market.
Essex County county-level context
These are county-level observations for Essex County, shown as context for Keeseville. They are not city measurements.
Coverage: rent 1/1, house prices 1/1, housing stock 1/1, permits 1/1 county.
Rent benchmark
$1,171
-14 (-1.2%) from the prior benchmark.
FY 2027 HUD FMR · 1/1 county coverage
House-price movement
+1%
Annual county movement; it does not forecast future prices.
2025 FHFA county HPI annual change · 1/1 county coverage
Housing stock
+3.4%
+3.4% housing stock and -2.2% population from 2020 to 2025.
2020–2025 Census Vintage · 1/1 county coverage
Permitted units
7.2
188 estimated permitted units in 2025; permits are not completed homes.
2025 Census BPS annual estimated units · 1/1 county coverage