How individual Singapore districts performed during each cycle of the Singapore property market
Updated Sep 2026: The original 1996–2019 study is kept as written below. I have added a 2026 update near the end: resale-only median PSF by district for 1H2016, 2H2019, 1H2021 and 1H2026, using URA caveat data. Short version: the outer districts (D22, D19, D18, D20, D5) led; the CBD and Marina districts (D1, D2, D4, D9) lagged. D20 and D18 are still the quiet gems.
Most narratives track the overall Singapore private price path. This study dissects performance by district through ups and downs, looking for patterns that can inform later decisions.
Scope: Private, non-landed condominiums (excluding EC). District-level averages — individual projects can outperform or underperform their district. Based on public URA-style data as interpreted for the original Apr 2020 essay (data through ~2019Q4 / 2020Q1 windows). Not a forecast. Project selection still needs peer analysis.
Questions this piece tries to address:
- In an uptrend, do all districts benefit? In a downtrend, which are more resilient?
- Do D9 / D10 / D11 swing the most?
- How do major URA announcements affect district prices?
- Which districts over- or under-perform across cycles?
Singapore property market periods used
From 1996 (earliest electronic data used) to end-2019, eight up/down phases were identified on average PSF:
- Down — 1996Q3 to 1998Q4
- Up — 1998Q4 to 1999Q4
- Down — 1999Q4 to 2003Q4
- Up — 2003Q4 to 2007Q3
- Down — 2007Q3 to 2009Q1
- Up — 2009Q1 to 2014Q4
- Down — 2014Q4 to 2015Q3
- Up — 2015Q3 to 2019Q4
(Original post included cycle and district bar charts for each period; key findings are in the tables and narrative below.)
Do all districts rise together? Who survives downtrends?
In most growth periods, most districts were positive — except the 2015Q3–2019Q4 uptrend, when D16, D22, D27, and D25 saw price declines in this study. D22 (Jurong / Boon Lay) was notable after ~100% growth in 2009–2014; the “Jurong Lake District” hype appeared to cool after 2014, though long-term transformation still warranted monitoring.
In downtrends, three of four periods had districts that bucked the fall:
| Period | “Surviving” districts (gain in study) |
|---|---|
| 1999Q4–2003Q4 | D2 (30.4%), D7 (18.9%), D8 (18.2%), D9 (1.1%) |
| 2007Q3–2009Q1 | D18 (11.8%), D25 (9.7%), D3 (4.6%), D22 (1.0%) |
| 2014Q4–2015Q3 | D27 (21.8%), D20 (13.7%), D25 (12.4%), D26 (6.4%), D17 (4.3%), D23 (1.6%), D19 (1.0%), D21 (0.4%) |
Only D25 “survived” two downtrends — yet performed poorly in the following uptrend (shortage of new stock was one hypothesis). In 2014–2015, most survivors were outside the central region.
Lesson: downturns are not uniformly bleak; some districts still offered relative resilience in history.
Do D9 / D10 / D11 swing the most?
Impression often says core CCR districts swing hardest. Data in this study only partly agreed: D9/D10 sometimes ranked in top gainers (e.g. 2003–2007) and sometimes among worse losers (D10 in two downtrends; D9 ~−46% in 2007–2009).
The clearest “mood swing” district in the sample was District 2: repeatedly top-5 gainer in uptrends and top-5 loser in downtrends — including ~−58% (1996–1998) and ~+553% (2003–2007) on average PSF in the original read.
Major URA developments
- Jurong (D22) — plans expanded ~2008; D22 “survived” 2007–2009 and later ~100% gain 2009–2014, then cooled.
- Woodlands Regional Centre (D25) — announced ~2013; D25 survived 2014–2015 with ~12% gain while most districts fell, then weakened later.
- Paya Lebar airbase shift (D14) — 2013 narrative contributed to a short jump that helped D14 rank among top gainers in 2009–2014; announcement effect faded next period.
- 2018-era announcements — limited short-term imprint in the study window.
Takeaway: announcement hype is real; full urban benefit often takes a decade+. Do not buy a district on announcement alone — entry price still matters.
Over- and under-performers across cycles
Across the eight phases, D2 appeared most often among top performers; D4 most often among worst performers — yet neither dominated the rolling 5- and 10-year leaderboards the same way.
| Category | 2010Q1–2020Q1 | 2015Q1–2020Q1 |
|---|---|---|
| Top 5 performing | 28, 14, 20, 13, 18 | 7, 21, 20, 18, 26 |
| Top 5 worst | 4, 1, 9, 27, 11 | 25, 22, 16, 27, 1 |
D20 and D18 looked like quieter “gems” — repeatedly strong over both windows. D27 and D1 stayed weak longer; D1 appeared to be improving off the worst list in the five-year cut.
2026 update: how districts did after 2019
Method. URA private caveats, condominium and apartment resales only. New-sale prices are excluded because a big launch in one half-year would swing a district's median. For each district I compare median PSF across four windows: 1H2016, 2H2019 (where the original study ended), 1H2021 and 1H2026 (Jan–Jun 2026, the latest complete half). Districts with very few resales (D6, D24) are left out. A median also moves with which units trade: a district where newer projects start reselling will look stronger. Read these numbers as direction, not precision.
Since the original study (2H2019 → 1H2026):
| Rank | Top 5 districts | Change | Bottom 5 districts | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | D22 Jurong / Boon Lay | +73.6% | D1 Raffles Place / Marina | −10.0% |
| 2 | D19 Serangoon / Hougang / Punggol | +60.8% | D7 Beach Road / Bugis | −6.3% |
| 3 | D18 Tampines / Pasir Ris | +57.8% | D2 Tanjong Pagar / Chinatown | +8.8% |
| 4 | D5 West Coast / Clementi | +56.6% | D4 Sentosa / HarbourFront | +13.9% |
| 5 | D25 Woodlands | +54.8% | D9 Orchard / River Valley | +17.0% |
Rolling windows — same format as the original table:
| Category | 10 years (1H2016 → 1H2026) | 5 years (1H2021 → 1H2026) |
|---|---|---|
| Top 5 performing | 28, 22, 20, 18, 19 | 22, 18, 19, 21, 3 |
| Top 5 worst | 1, 9, 2, 4, 8 | 1, 9, 2, 4, 8 |
Selected districts, median resale PSF (S$):
| District | 1H2016 | 2H2019 | 1H2021 | 1H2026 | 10-yr change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | 1,753 | 2,164 | 2,038 | 1,947 | +11.1% |
| D9 | 2,018 | 2,033 | 2,060 | 2,379 | +17.9% |
| D10 | 1,628 | 1,767 | 1,834 | 2,242 | +37.7% |
| D15 | 1,161 | 1,284 | 1,371 | 1,828 | +57.5% |
| D18 | 806 | 954 | 1,021 | 1,506 | +86.9% |
| D19 | 946 | 1,057 | 1,161 | 1,699 | +79.6% |
| D20 | 1,039 | 1,265 | 1,419 | 1,953 | +88.1% |
| D22 | 850 | 946 | 1,059 | 1,642 | +93.2% |
| D25 | 873 | 752 | 958 | 1,164 | +33.3% |
| D28 | 778 | 1,029 | 1,141 | 1,559 | +100.4% |
What changed since the 2020 read:
- D22 turned around. It was on the worst list in 2015–2020. It has since been the top gainer, rising about 74% from 2H2019. The Jurong Lake District story took roughly a decade to show in prices, which matches the original point that redevelopment is a multi-year story.
- D20 and D18 are still on the top list. They were the “quiet gems” in 2020 and are still near the top on both the 5- and 10-year windows.
- D1 is still weak, and D9 and D2 have joined it. The core CBD and prime districts are at the bottom on every window. In 2026, entry prices in the city fringe and suburbs rose much faster than prime prices. Higher ABSD for foreigners since April 2023 also weighs on prime demand.
- D25 recovered from a low base. It was the weakest district in 2019. Since then it has gained about 55%, but over 10 years it is still in the bottom half.
- This was not a cycle with clear downturns. 2020–2026 was mostly one long uptrend, cooled by the Dec 2021 and Apr 2023 measures. The official URA price index rose 3.9% in 2024, 3.3% in 2025, and about 1.4% in 1H2026. Lagging districts were mainly the ones that were already expensive.
The lesson from 2020 still holds: use district history as context, then compare the project itself.
Conclusion
Ups and downs are uneven by district. Crisis can still hold opportunity; boom is not universal. Major redevelopment is a multi-year story. Quiet districts can compound. Use district history as context, then evaluate the project with structured methods.
See also
Next step
Comparing districts for a five-year hold? Send constraints and shortlist on WhatsApp — we combine cycle context with project-level comparison.