Singapore Condo Profits and Losses: How to Read 2025 Data

Last updated 17 October 2026

Headlines about “most profitable condos” and “biggest condo losses” spread quickly in Singapore. Many round-ups list project-by-project gains without showing a caveat ID, a contract date, or a methodology you can audit. This page explains how those statistics are usually built, what one published loss-making figure (as at Q3 2025) actually said, and why we are not republishing an unverified top-20 profit or loss table here.

This article is general information, not financial, legal or property advice. It doesn’t take your personal circumstances into account. Property results vary by unit, timing, leverage and costs; past transaction outcomes are not a prediction of future results.

What “profit” and “loss” mean in resale round-ups

In most media and consultancy summaries of private-home resales, a transaction is labelled a profit or loss when the latest resale price is compared with an earlier purchase price for the same unit (often from caveat records). That simple comparison usually ignores renovation, stamp duties, agent fees, interest, CPF accrued interest and taxes. Two tables can disagree if they use different date filters, exclude en bloc or dual deals differently, or annualise returns with different day-count rules.

Unit-level caveat data in Singapore is commonly accessed through URA REALIS (a paid service). Unless a publisher shows the underlying caveats or an official URA table, a “top 20” list is only as trustworthy as that publisher’s method, and many blogs cite “URA REALIS” generically without row-level proof.

Why this rewrite drops the old top-20 tables

An earlier version of this post carried two league tables (largest profits and largest losses) with project names, districts, holding periods and annualised returns, plus district-level summaries. Our review found rows that could not be traced, including internally implausible gain sizes and at least one wrong district label. We could not rebuild those tables from URA-published, freely citable REALIS extracts in this draft pass.

So the tables are removed. If we later obtain a properly cited dataset (URA publication or caveat IDs for each row), the tables can be rebuilt row by row. Until then, listing invented or unverifiable ranks would be worse than having no table.

One sourced Q3 2025 figure

For market-level loss-making activity (not a project league table), The Business Times (22 Oct 2025), using data Cushman & Wakefield consolidated for BT, reported that in Q3 2025, 3.8% of all private-home resale transactions were at a loss, up from 3.2% in Q2. Cushman & Wakefield research head Wong Xian Yang noted that 108 such deals was the highest quarterly count since Q3 2022, which is not the same statement as “the highest loss-making share since Q3 2022.”

That distinction matters when you read headlines: a rising count can reflect more resale volume overall, while the percentage tells you how common losses were among deals that quarter. For a longer-run view of price trends, our look at whether landed homes are still within reach in 2026 compares URA’s landed price index with household incomes.

How to check a claimed condo “profit” yourself

• Prefer sources that show both the buy and sell caveat (or URA/HDB identifiers), not only a net profit number.
• Confirm the project name and district against URA street directories or the developer’s project page. Wrong districts are a red flag.
• Ask whether the figure is gross price difference or a true net-of-costs return.
• Treat annualised percentage returns with caution when the holding period is short or the sample is a single unit.

Summary

Condo profit-and-loss league tables are only useful when every row is sourced. This guide uses one clearly attributed market-level statistic on loss-making resales as at Q3 2025, from Business Times / Cushman & Wakefield, and leaves out project-by-project tables that can’t be checked against public data.

FAQ

Why isn’t there a top-20 table on this page?

Because we could not verify the previous rows against URA-published or caveat-cited sources we can link. Publishing an unverifiable league table would mislead readers.

Where do professional analysts get unit-level profits?

Often from paid caveat databases such as URA REALIS, then cleaned with their own rules. Always read their methodology notes before comparing two firms’ “top profits” lists.