A reasonable thought, but for the typical buyer, stock gains don't move the affordability math much. Standard affordability measures are built around income and the monthly payment because those are what actually get most people into a home. The majority of buyers fall into two groups: first-timers putting down a modest amount they saved, and move-up buyers rolling equity from the sale of their current home into the next one. Neither group is generally cashing out a big stock portfolio to fund the purchase, so a rising market doesn't change what they can afford the way a raise or a lower rate would. Stock-market wealth genuinely matters at the top. Ultra-luxury, multi-million-dollar buyers are far more tied to market performance, both because their wealth is concentrated in it and because their tax picture and confidence swing with it. In that segment, a soaring market and a scary one both show up quickly in buying behavior. But that's a thin slice of transactions, and affordability indexes are trying to describe the broad market. So the disconnect you're pointing at, strong markets alongside stretched affordability, is real. It just doesn't resolve by adding portfolio gains into the average buyer's calculation, because that's rarely where their down payment comes from. If you're wondering how your own assets factor into what you can buy, that's exactly what we map out on the free Roadmap conversation, using your real numbers rather than a national index.