A Deep Dive on Rental Growth Rates

Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. • September 20, 2023
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

In this edition of the Bird’s Eye View, we take you on a deeper dive through both the art and science of one of these variables: rental rate growth.

Underwriting a multi-family real estate deal is a mix of art and science. Projected investment returns are highly dependent on the assumptions you make, especially about cap rates, deal timeline, interest rates, government regulation, inflation rates, vacancy rates, and rental growth rates.

The science part of underwriting comes from using the best possible data, combined with knowledge of economic patterns, to evaluate a range of scenarios that could play out in a given project, market and asset class.

The art part of underwriting comes when we attempt to establish probabilities for each of these potential scenarios.

In this edition of the Bird’s Eye View, we take you on a deeper dive through both the art and science of one of these variables: rental rate growth.


Rental Rate Growth


Since early 2021, rental rates in Canada have been rising at unprecedented speeds. The question is, will they continue or will the trend reverse? To answer, we need to understand the supply/demand equation and what has driven rental price increases.

Demand

The story of real estate demand in Canada is synonymous with the story of immigration and temporary residents, and the rental rate chart above tracks closely with immigration levels.


In 2020, as a result of border closures, Canada brought in the lowest totals of immigrants and temporary residents seen in recent history. The result is that Canada’s population only increased by 134,449 (while 198,761 new units of housing were completed). This brought a corresponding decrease in rents.

In 2021, immigration numbers reversed to record-breaking levels, which records were further broken in 2022, and likely will be again in 2023.

For 2022,
Statistics Canada reported, “international migration accounted for nearly all growth recorded (95.9%) [...], Canada welcomed 437,180 immigrants and saw a net increase of the number of non-permanent residents estimated at 607,782.” The total increase in population from these sources was approximately 1,044,962 people in that year.

Though the counts aren’t yet official for 2023,
Statistics Canada is projecting an even higher rate of population growth on the heels of a record breaking 1st quarter in 2023, with 98% of population growth coming from immigration and temporary residents.

Immigrants and Non-permanent residents (NPRs) are primarily renters


According to another 2021
publication, “recent immigrants were more likely to live in rented dwellings (56%) than the total population (27%), owing to a greater proportion of individuals in both subsidized and non-subsidized housing.”


Further,
Statistics Canada cites that in 2021, 78.5% of NPRs lived in rental housing.

If these proportions hold true, in 2022, Canada added 721,930 people to the rental pool from immigration alone.

This is an increase in rental demand at a level that is completely unprecedented in Canada.

What would happen if we slowed immigration?

If we are bringing in over 1M+ people into Canada each year, and 96-98% of population growth is explained by immigration, wouldn’t slowing down immigration drastically slow rental rate growth?

The answer is yes, but it would also cause detrimental effects on the economy because of Canada’s low birth rates, aging population, and labour shortages.

Consider these chilling quotes from
Statistics Canada:


“Immigration accounts for almost 100% of Canada’s labour force growth.”


“Canada’s aging population means that the worker-to-retiree ratio is expected to shift from 7-to-1 50 years ago to 2-to-1 by 2035.”

“Immigrants account for 36% of physicians, 33% business owners with paid staff, and 41% of engineers.”


Canada’s economy has become highly dependent on immigration and NPRs.


On a going forward basis, the
Government of Canada’s Immigration Levels Plan for 2023-2025 sets a target for immigration levels to increase further to 500,000 by 2025 (while the rate of new NPRs has been high for 2023, it remains to be seen whether Canada will bring in as many NPRs in future years).


This plan is revised every year by November 1st, and the Immigration Minister, Marc Miller, has indicated that he doesn’t see targets decreasing in the 2024 - 2026 plan. “I don’t see a world in which we lower [immigration targets], the need is too great … whether we revise them upwards or not is something that I have to look at but certainly, I don’t think [we will] lower them”.

At this point, it isn’t clear how immigration targets may change if there is a change in leadership at the Federal level. Pierre Poilievre hasn’t specifically answered the question of whether he would reduce immigration targets, but he has clearly taken the stance that he would implement policy to accelerate supply.


What happens to rental demand if we see a recession that heavily affects employment?

Though we have heard no talk of this in the media, we feel that
if we entered a recession that seriously affected employment, there is a possibility that rental rates could decrease.


If there is a recession that seriously affects employment (compared with a recession where there is still full employment), many temporary foreign workers will lose their jobs and be required to return home.

This is an untested assumption, but seeing as
immigrants have been disproportionately affected during previous recessions, we anticipate that the huge number of temporary foreign workers, brought in to fill labour shortages, may experience job loss at a higher rate in a recession.  If this happened at scale, Canada would likely see low population growth, or even population decline, and rents could drop significantly.

While we see this as a low probability outcome, it is an important risk to consider.


Other factors affecting rental demand


  1. Affordability of ownership - As the costs of ownership continue to rise, largely due to higher interest rates, we anticipate that some people may choose, or be forced into renting as a lower cost alternative.
  2. Freedom of mobility - Across all age groups, there is a greater proportion of renters compared to homeowners than a decade ago (RBC, The Rise of Renters). For those that express a preference to rent, freedom of mobility is often cited as a primary reason.


Supply

Over the last 4 years, Canada has averaged 239,903 housing starts and 207,138 units completed each year.

This total is woefully insufficient to meet current demand. In 2020, Scotiabank released a housing brief that indicated that Canada had the lowest number of homes per 1,000 people, at 424.

In 2022, Canada would have needed to construct 445,246 new housing units, just to maintain our worst-in-class average. Instead, we added 219,942 new housing units, which equates to 209 units per 1,000 new people in Canada. 


While this analysis is slightly simplistic, it makes it painfully obvious why rents are increasing. Canada added half as many units to the supply as it needed to in order to maintain the historic equilibrium.


How likely is it that Canada will be successful at increasing supply?


Regardless of who is running the federal government, given the public outcry and focus from all parties, it is likely that new housing starts will increase over the next 3 years.

However, we are sceptical that there is any chance of doubling the number of housing units completed per year in the near term. Incentivizing development with policy, such as the recently announced GST rebate will make an appreciable difference, though there are two other hurdles that must be overcome for massively increasing supply to become a legitimate possibility.


First, we do not presently have enough construction workers to support a vastly higher level of construction. Unfortunately, labour shortage has been a barrier even at present levels of construction. (For an in depth read on this point, check out
CIBC’s recent Economic Report)


Second, without sweeping changes to municipal development approval processes, processing a much higher number of applications in a shorter period of time is a pipe dream. As a former City Manager, I don’t have any confidence that this could be done quickly, unless senior levels of government are willing to override municipal authority, a proposition that would bring its own set of issues.

Conclusion


Canada’s current level of construction is sufficient to support annual population increases of approximately 518,731 at present levels of affordability.  All indications are that Canada intends to expand its population at nearly double this rate, and it is unlikely that increases in supply will be able to keep up.

Though we still underwrite conservatively, since immigration policy could change quickly, or we could experience a major recession, we anticipate that we will continue to see strong rental rate growth over the next 3 years.

Though this is only one variable of many, we hope that it gives you a sense of the types of considerations we make in the process of underwriting investment deals. We can’t predict the future, though we take pride in our role in vetting deals, researching, and talking with industry experts, and using that information to present you with the best possible real estate investment opportunities.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE BIRD'S EYE VIEW

By Hawkeye+ Wealth+Ltd. October 4, 2025
Introduction Canadian farmland hasn’t posted a single annual decline in value since 1992 . Take a second to soak that up. More than thirty years, multiple recessions, inflation spikes, a housing crash and a tech- bubble. Through it all, farmland kept climbing. In a world where many asset classes appear vulnerable to technological disruption or shifting consumer preferences, the core value in farmland is tied to a necessity that will always remain constant. Food. In this edition of the Bird’s Eye View , we discuss the case for investing in Canadian farmland and share the most compelling points and potential risks from our due diligence on this asset class. The Investment Case for Canadian Farmland In our view, farmland has six main features that make farmland investment attractive: 1. Consistent Performance and Low Volatility - A 30+ year track-record of positive annual returns is astounding, even more so when you consider that the average annual increase over that period has been 8.1%. Past performance doesn’t guarantee future returns, but there is merit to the fact that farmland has been remarkably consistent through periods of high market volatility. When considering that the figures above don’t account for any profit from the land, farmland has done an impressive job of delivering returns comparable to U.S. equities, but with a volatility profile that more closely resembles bonds. 2. Natural Scarcity - Most cities are established near fresh water and fertile soil. Thus as populations grow and cities expand, that development inherently reduces the base of potential farmland. While most provinces have some level of agricultural land protection program in place, the fact remains that there is a finite amount of farmable land, and each year there is less of it. 3. Diversification and Inflation Hedge - Farmland has a long track record of holding its value when inflation eats away at other assets. Rising food prices translate directly into stronger farm revenues, which in turn support rental income and land appreciation. Additionally, over the last 50 years, farms have averaged an increase in productivity of ~1.5% per year by adopting new technology and processes (machinery, irrigation, nutrient management), which serves as a natural inflation hedge. Unlike equities or bonds, farmland’s performance has shown little correlation with public markets , giving it genuine diversification benefits. 4. Investor-Tenant Alignment - For anyone feeling exhausted with the rhetoric about ‘greedy developers’, it may come as welcome news that investors and landlords aren’t automatically the bad guy in the farmland space. Research shows that farmers are able to drive higher levels of profitability per acre when renting compared to when purchasing farmland , and that trend is accelerating. While renting doesn’t necessarily outperform ownership over the long-run when accounting for land appreciation benefits, it does improve cashflow. Since farming is capital intensive, renting land allows farmers to allocate funds that would have otherwise gone to land, toward equipment and operations that improve yield and profitability. Since farmers’ profitability depends on sustaining yields, they are naturally incentivized to care for the soil and manage the land well, which not only supports their own returns but helps preserve and even enhance the underlying land value. As a result, the ‘renter’s mentality’ sometimes seen in other real estate sectors is far less common in farming. 5. Comparative Affordability - In housing, the current challenge is that people can’t afford to pay what developers can feasibly build. In comparison, while farms are comparatively less affordable than they were 5 years ago, the gap is far less dramatic than it has been in housing. Farm values and rents have rapidly increased, but the revenue generated by those farms has also substantially increased , which has slowed the loss of affordability. While current affordability levels are still a concern in the space, farmers can still operate profitably at current price levels and as shown on the chart below from Farm Credit Canada , we are nowhere near the peaks of unaffordability that farmers experienced during the 1980’s:
By Hawkeye+ Wealth+Ltd. August 23, 2025
Capital doesn’t flow to markets where demand is slow and supply is surging, it goes to places where demand outpaces supply and prices are rising. That’s not a flaw, it’s the system working as designed, rewarding investment in those markets that most need it.
By Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. July 6, 2025
Canada’s $26B prefab housing bet promises faster, greener builds — but claims of affordability gains don’t hold up under scrutiny.
By Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. May 31, 2025
Introduction The Liberal Government is in and we are starting to get more clarity on what that means for housing in Canada. In our last article, we compared the Liberal vs. Conservative Housing Platforms , and discussed how the majority of the Liberal housing platform would be positive for housing investors, but that the Build Canada Homes program had the potential to negatively overshadow everything else. One month later, our opinion has softened. The limited documentation available about Build Canada Homes indicates that the government will be (directly) building far fewer homes than we initially anticipated, which has materially lowered our level of concern. Build Canada Homes looks to be far too small to displace private builders or upset private markets. In this edition of the Bird’s Eye View, we review publicly available information on the Build Canada Homes program to determine its scale and potential impact. We then turn to the secondary question of how successful that program is likely to be as we review two of the models that the Liberals have used as inspiration for Build Canada Homes; the Wartime Homes Limited program that saw the Federal Government get directly involved in homebuilding post-WWII, as well as the Singaporean Public Housing model. Build Canada Homes “The Liberal housing plan will double Canada’s current rate of residential construction over the next decade to reach 500,000 homes per year”. Liberal Housing Plan, March 31, 2025 We begin as we so often do with a caveat. It’s important to recognize that there is uncertainty about what this program will look like, as the entire housing plan (at least what is publicly available) is a mere two-page document. The truth is that we really don’t know what this program will look like, even if we know its goals and now have cost estimates. Canada built ~245,000 homes in 2024, which is near the all-time high for annual construction (257,453 units were built in 1974). Getting to 500,000 units by 2036 feels like it borders on impossible, and is potentially much higher than what’s necessary. When we saw the 500,000 homes per year target, alongside the words “deeply affordable,” and the announcement that “the Federal government will get back in the business of building homes”, we saw a very real potential for the heavy disincentivization of private development. If the government is going to compete with private industry while subsidizing costs, why would private industry build anything? Why would private investment fund it? On further review, those concerns are now much smaller than we initially feared. Since we won’t see the 2025 federal budget until the fall , we are limited to the Liberal Housing Plan as well as the Liberal Fiscal and Costing Plan to get a sense for the program itself and how much money the Feds will be allocating to it, but those documents indicate that funding allocations will be small. Here are some of the housing highlights from the Liberal Fiscal and Costing Plan: 
By Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. April 19, 2025
Introduction Election season is here, and while housing affordability and availability have taken a backseat to how Canada should approach its relationship with the United States, changes to housing policy still feature as central pillars of both the Conservative and Liberal party platforms. What makes their proposed changes particularly notable is that since the 1980s, the Federal Government has played a smaller role in housing compared to Municipal and Provincial governments, influencing markets indirectly through immigration and monetary policy. Those days look to be over, as both parties have introduced proposals that would see the Federal Government take a much more active role. In this edition of the Bird’s Eye View, we review the housing platforms for both the Conservative and Liberal parties, and offer our opinion on how these policies will impact development generally, and real estate investors specifically. Note: We recognize that other parties also have housing platforms, but for brevity, we are only covering the Conservative and Liberal platforms. Policies in Common Between Conservatives and Liberals Before we dive into the novel proposals from each party, we begin with three policies in common: 1. Elimination of GST on new homes Both parties have proposed to eliminate GST on new homes, but there is a massive difference in the size and scope of the two programs:
By Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. February 22, 2025
Most investors would be thrilled with the outcomes forecasted in the CMHC 2025 Housing Market Outlook given the level of uncertainty ahead. The question is, how likely is CMHC to be right?
By Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. January 25, 2025
Demand is high and has nearly chewed through the supply overhang in many markets, which should result in rising rents and falling vacancies over the next few years.
By Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. December 21, 2024
While GDP isn’t a perfect predictor of housing prices, the two tend to run in the same direction. If we do in fact see a decline in GDP from 2024, it would take a unique set of circumstances to see anything more than flat housing prices in 2025.
By Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. November 23, 2024
It doesn’t take a genius to hypothesize that population decreases could cause rental rates and housing prices to soften over the next two years. However, a look at historical data shows that changes in population growth often don’t result in immediate housing price changes
By Hawkeye Wealth Ltd. September 21, 2024
"We may never know where we’re going, but we’d better have a good idea where we are." - Howard Marks