Was checking supply/demand signals and found a clean example of why a single metric will mislead you on market conditions (house data, period end 31 May 2026):

* [Glenorchy, TAS ](https://www.htag.com.au/tas/tas92-glenorchy-city-council/glenorchy-tas-7010/)— 0.22% of homes listed, 23 days on market, 0.96 months of inventory
* [Bendigo, VIC](https://www.htag.com.au/vic/vic193-greater-bendigo-city/bendigo-vic-3550/) — 0.21% of homes listed, 72 days on market, 2.13 months of inventory

Near-identical "stock on market", but Glenorchy clears its stock in \~3 weeks and Bendigo takes \~10. One's a textbook seller's market; the other is buyer-leaning. If you'd judged either on listings alone you'd have read it exactly backwards.

The takeaway I keep relearning: market balance is a panel, not a number. I look at stock on market, days on market, inventory (months of supply), vacancy, and auction clearance together — and always at the suburb level, because the "national market" doesn't exist when you're making an offer.

Curious how others here judge buyer vs seller conditions before negotiating — which signals do you weight most, and has DOM vs inventory ever disagreed for you?

*(Figures are from HtAG Analytics; happy to talk method in the comments.)*

Full breakdown — the five signals and how to read them together, with the Glenorchy vs Bendigo worked example: [https://www.htag.com.au/buyers-market-vs-sellers-market-australia/](https://www.htag.com.au/buyers-market-vs-sellers-market-australia/)

Two suburbs with identical "stock on market" — one's a seller's market, one's buyer-leaning. A reminder not to trust one metric.