.svg)
.png)
We continued to see sizable regional shifts in costs for home buyer leads on Google Ads in CINC's portfolio of real estate team and agent clients in Q2 2023.
Of the largest markets, we saw largest improvements in buyer lead costs in Philadelphia and Texas relative to other comparably sized markets.
There was also considerable strength in Heartland states of Iowa, Arkansas, and Tennessee with 4 of the 5 lowest real estate lead cost markets being located in those states.
Moving westward, we saw sizable decreases in buyer lead costs in Mountain West States of Utah, Idaho, Colorado with 5 of the 8 largest lead cost declines year-over-year being located in those states.
CINC is the leader in online real estate lead generation with more than 50,000 clients. This behind-the-scenes lead cost data is what we were seeing for our portfolio of real estate team and agent clients during Q2 2023. The CINC client marketing team manages almost $30 million in search and social advertising spend annually for real estate teams and agents across the United States and Canada. If you want to see how CINC can help you find more higher quality hyperlocal real estate leads on Google, request a demo here.
Lowest Real Estate Lead Cost Markets for Buyers on Google
Bangor (Maine), Sioux City (Iowa) and Hot Springs (Arkansas) had the lowest real estate buyer lead costs of any market. Bangor had a very low $1.59 cost per lead.
4 of the Top 5 lowest real estate lead cost markets were located in Heartland states of Iowa, Arkansas, and Tennessee.
| Market Rank | Market | Q2 2023 Cost Per Lead (CPL) |
| 1 | Bangor, ME | $1.59 |
| 2 | Sioux City, IA-NE-SD | $1.98 |
| 3 | Hot Springs, AR | $2.50 |
| 4 | Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN-VA | $2.63 |
| 5 | Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL | $2.88 |
| 6 | Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls, NY | $2.90 |
| 7 | Lafayette, LA | $2.95 |
| 8 | San Angelo, TX | $2.95 |
| 9 | Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC | $3.05 |
| 10 | Altoona, PA | $3.12 |
Biggest Markets with Lowest Real Estate Lead Costs for Buyers on Google
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ($5.89 cost per lead) moved up the most in the rankings in Q2 2023 quarter-over-quarter, moving up 3 spots to become the #4 lowest buyer lead cost of all the biggest markets.
Texas was also well represented in the Top 10 with both Houston (ranked #2) and Dallas (ranked #9) both moving up 1 slot in Top 10 big market buyer lead cost rankings quarter-over-quarter.
| Market Rank | Market | Q2 2023 Cost Per Lead (CPL) |
| 1 | St. Louis, MO-IL | $ 4.52 |
| 2 | Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX | $ 5.41 |
| 3 | Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI | $ 5.69 |
| 4 | Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD | $ 5.89 |
| 5 | Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL | $ 5.97 |
| 6 | Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA | $ 6.31 |
| 7 | Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD | $ 6.51 |
| 8 | Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH | $ 6.73 |
| 9 | Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX | $ 7.09 |
| 10 | Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL | $ 7.09 |
Biggest Real Estate Lead Cost Declines for Buyers on Google for Top 100 Markets
Toledo, Ohio (39% lead cost decline) saw the largest overall real estate buyer lead cost decline year-over-year.
5 of the 8 markets that saw the largest year-over-year decreases in lead cost in Q2 2023 were located in Mountain West states of Utah, Colorado, and Idaho.
| Market Rank | Market | Q2 2023 Cost Per Lead (CPL) | % Change Year-Over-year |
| 1 | Toledo, OH | $ 3.78 | -39% |
| 2 | Worcester, MA-CT | $ 4.77 | -30% |
| 3 | San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA | $ 11.57 | -7% |
| 4 | Salt Lake City, UT | $ 9.81 | -6% |
| 5 | Colorado Springs, CO | $ 10.46 | -4% |
| 6 | Provo-Orem, UT | $ 10.26 | -4% |
| 7 | Boise City, ID | $ 9.05 | -1% |
| 8 | Ogden-Clearfield, UT | $ 8.74 | -1% |
Real Estate Lead Cost for Buyers on Google for Top 100 Markets
|
Rank |
Market |
Q2 2023 Cost Per Lead (CPL) | % Change Year-Over-Year |
|
1 |
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA |
$ 7.54 | 29% |
|
2 |
$ 9.96 | 28% | |
|
3 |
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI |
$ 5.69 | 25% |
|
4 |
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX |
$ 7.09 | 22% |
|
5 |
Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX |
$ 5.41 | 29% |
|
6 |
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD |
$ 5.89 | 19% |
|
7 |
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV |
$ 8.55 | 23% |
|
8 |
$ 7.09 | 31% | |
|
9 |
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA |
$ 6.31 | 37% |
|
10 |
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH |
$ 6.73 | 8% |
|
11 |
$ 13.12 | 9% | |
|
12 |
$ 8.73 | 10% | |
|
13 |
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ |
$ 9.60 | 15% |
|
14 |
Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI |
$ 7.33 | 25% |
|
15 |
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA |
$ 11.49 | 6% |
|
16 |
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI |
$ 8.97 | 35% |
|
17 |
$ 9.54 | 26% | |
|
18 |
$ 5.97 | 24% | |
|
19 |
St. Louis, MO-IL |
$ 4.52 | 18% |
|
20 |
Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD |
$ 6.51 | 37% |
|
21 |
Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, CO |
$ 10.83 | 27% |
|
22 |
Pittsburgh, PA |
$ 5.71 | 18% |
|
23 |
Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC |
$ 5.68 | 22% |
|
24 |
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA |
$ 9.66 | 22% |
|
25 |
San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX |
$ 5.21 | 13% |
|
26 |
$ 6.08 | 25% | |
|
27 |
$ 9.66 | 3% | |
|
28 |
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN |
$ 5.58 | 43% |
|
29 |
Cleveland-Elyria, OH |
$ 6.91 | 14% |
|
30 |
Kansas City, MO-KS |
$ 5.89 | 22% |
|
31 |
Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise, NV |
$ 9.36 | 17% |
|
32 |
Columbus, OH |
$ 5.53 | 17% |
|
33 |
Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson, IN |
$ 5.11 | 20% |
|
34 |
$ 11.57 | -7% | |
|
35 |
Austin-Round Rock, TX |
$ 8.48 | 25% |
|
36 |
Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN |
$ 8.14 | 24% |
|
37 |
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC |
$ 6.78 | 0% |
|
38 |
Providence-Warwick, RI-MA |
$ 5.68 | 3% |
|
39 |
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI |
$ 5.68 | 45% |
|
40 |
$ 6.36 | 33% | |
|
41 |
Memphis, TN-MS-AR |
$ 5.43 | 26% |
|
42 |
Oklahoma City, OK |
$ 5.74 | 51% |
|
43 |
Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN |
$ 5.39 | 9% |
|
44 |
Richmond, VA |
$ 7.06 | 56% |
|
45 |
New Orleans-Metairie, LA |
$ 3.56 | 10% |
|
46 |
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT |
$ 5.83 | 30% |
|
47 |
Raleigh, NC |
$ 7.51 | 38% |
|
48 |
Birmingham-Hoover, AL |
$ 4.98 | 78% |
|
49 |
Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls, NY |
$ 2.90 | 35% |
|
50 |
Salt Lake City, UT |
$ 9.81 | -6% |
|
Rank |
Market |
Q2 2023 Cost Per Lead (CPL) | % Change Year-Over-year |
|
51 |
Rochester, NY |
$ 3.44 | 14% |
|
52 |
Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI |
$ 7.30 | 31% |
|
53 |
Tucson, AZ |
$ 9.71 | 40% |
|
54 |
Urban Honolulu, HI |
$ 5.81 | 4% |
|
55 |
Tulsa, OK |
$ 4.85 | 44% |
|
56 |
$ 5.58 | 13% | |
|
57 |
Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT |
$ 7.09 | 12% |
|
58 |
Worcester, MA-CT |
$ 4.77 | -30% |
|
59 |
Albuquerque, NM |
$ 7.73 | 26% |
|
60 |
Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA |
$ 4.66 | 27% |
|
61 |
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY |
$ 4.44 | 35% |
|
62 |
New Haven-Milford, CT |
$ 5.40 | 94% |
|
63 |
$ 7.05 | 33% | |
|
64 |
Knoxville, TN |
$ 5.88 | 28% |
|
65 |
Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin, SC |
$ 6.08 | 46% |
|
66 |
$ 7.82 | 42% | |
|
67 |
El Paso, TX |
$ 5.64 | 164% |
|
68 |
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ |
$ 4.90 | 84% |
|
69 |
Baton Rouge, LA |
$ 5.72 | 174% |
|
70 |
McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX |
NA | #VALUE! |
|
71 |
Dayton, OH |
$ 5.82 | 43% |
|
72 |
Columbia, SC |
$ 4.62 | 12% |
|
73 |
Greensboro-High Point, NC |
$ 5.28 | 41% |
|
74 |
$ 7.54 | 41% | |
|
75 |
Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR |
$ 3.54 | 15% |
|
76 |
$ 12.01 | 39% | |
|
77 |
Akron, OH |
$ 7.19 | 26% |
|
78 |
Charleston-North Charleston, SC |
$ 9.14 | 10% |
|
79 |
Colorado Springs, CO |
$ 10.46 | -4% |
|
80 |
Syracuse, NY |
$ 4.29 | 33% |
|
81 |
Winston-Salem, NC |
$ 4.39 | 24% |
|
82 |
$ 8.11 | 39% | |
|
83 |
Boise City, ID |
$ 9.05 | -1% |
|
84 |
Wichita, KS |
$ 4.17 | 17% |
|
85 |
Springfield, MA |
NA | #VALUE! |
|
86 |
Madison, WI |
$ 5.83 | 5% |
|
87 |
$ 4.46 | 33% | |
|
88 |
Ogden-Clearfield, UT |
$ 8.74 | 0% |
|
89 |
Toledo, OH |
$ 3.78 | -39% |
|
90 |
$ 7.75 | 39% | |
|
91 |
Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA |
$ 10.03 | 49% |
|
92 |
Jackson, MS |
$ 4.00 | 68% |
|
93 |
Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC |
$ 4.64 | 26% |
|
94 |
Scranton–Wilkes-Barre–Hazleton, PA |
NA | #VALUE! |
|
95 |
Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA |
$ 5.81 | #VALUE! |
|
96 |
Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA |
$ 6.43 | 145% |
|
97 |
Provo-Orem, UT |
$ 10.26 | -4% |
|
98 |
$ 6.33 | 67% | |
|
99 |
Chattanooga, TN-GA |
$ 5.94 | 44% |
|
100 |
Spokane-Spokane Valley, WA |
$ 12.28 | 49% |
Additional Google Real Estate Lead Gen Resources from CINC:
With the real estate market shifting, it is more important than ever to be more efficient paying for leads on Google. Try our free local Google real estate targeting tool here to find hidden pockets of more cost effective hyper-local leads near you.
.png?width=2240&height=800&name=Secret%20Submarket%20Finder%20Tool%20(1).png)
Watch our recent on-demand real estate lead gen webinar here where we discuss new trends for real estate teams and agents on Google Ads, including a deep dive on Google Local Service Ads (LSA's) for realtors.
Here are links to past historic Buyer Cost Per Lead Reports for Q1 2023, Q4 2022, Q3 2022, Q2 2022, Q1 2022, Q4 2021, Q3 2021, Q2 2021, Q1 2021, Q4 2020, Q3 2020, Q2 2020, Q1 2020.