June 2022: Market Indicators Report

Click here for the full June 2022 Loudoun County Market Indicators Report for the Dulles Area Association of REALTORS® by Virginia REALTORS®.  

Key Market Trends

Sales activity is moderating in most local markets in Loudoun County.
There were 703 sales throughout the county in June, 256 fewer sales than a year ago, which is a 26.7% decline. Ashburn zip code 20148 had 57 fewer sales than last June, which is a 35.2% decrease. There were 51 fewer sales in the Leesburg zip code 20176 market (-39.2%), and 28 fewer sales in Sterling zip code 20165 (-32.2%). Purcellville zip code 20132 and Leesburg zip code 20175 were the only local markets with an increase in sales, up 35.3% and 1.6%, respectively from last June.

Pending sales continue to cool down in the Loudoun County market.
There were 597 pending sales across the county in June, 262 fewer pending sales than a year ago, which is a 30.5% decrease. Pending sales activity has been moderating in the county for 13 straight months compared to the prior year. The sharpest drop this month was in Ashburn zip code 20148 (-48.1%) and Sterling zip code 20165 (-53.6%).

Despite slowdown in sales activity, home prices continue to trend upward.
At $695,000, the June median sales price in Loudoun County was $35,000 higher than it was last year, representing a 5.3% price increase. Most local markets in the county had price growth in June led by Aldie zip code 20105 (+15.2%), Purcellville zip code 20132 (+12.7%), and Lovettsville zip code 20180 (+11.2%).

Supply continues to build up across the Loudoun County housing market.
There were 655 active listings across the county at the end of June, 263 more listings than last year, which is a 67.1% surge. Most of the additional listings were in Aldie zip code 20105 (+74 listings) and Leesburg zip code 20176 (+51 listings).


Data Note: The housing market data for all jurisdictions in Virginia was re-benchmarked in November 2021. Please note that Market Indicator Reports released prior to November 2021 were produced using the prior data vintage and may not tie to reports that use the current data set for some metrics. We recommend using the current reports for historical comparative analysis.

View full Report