Where is it worth being?

Demand is not published for individual properties. This rung stops aggregating places and draws the homes themselves, and every reading on this map is pooled across at least 5 people so that no one person's activity can be read out of it. A single property has no pool to hide in — "someone is watching this address" is the exact sentence the floor exists to prevent. Zoom out to a city view to read demand by locality.

Where is demand running ahead of supply?

3 more readings, and 1 mode this map does not have — and why

Supply — see Explore: This is the same view as Explore, not a missing one. Supply is the listing count, Explore paints the listing count, and there is no second measure that would make them different pictures. Two chips producing a byte-identical page is a control that appears to do nothing, which reads as the page being broken rather than as the two being the same question.

3 of 6 factors have no source on this platform — Price growth, Rental yield, Infrastructure. That is 40 of the model’s 100 points missing before anything is measured. Each score below says what it was actually computed from, and every place’s breakdown gives the reason for each gap.

Opportunity is unmet demand at a reachable price: people looking, not much already on the market, and not expensive to enter. Every factor is measured against the other places in this view.

Not scored at this zoom.

Zoom out to Locality

No factor is shared by every place in this view, so nothing is scored.

The full model — all 6 factors, their weights, and what is missing

Demand · 30/100 · higher is better: Are people looking here? Live — scored against the other places in view, where few people looking scores 0 and many people looking scores 100.
Supply · 15/100 · lower is better: How much is already on the market competing here? Live — scored against the other places in view, where crowded scores 0 and uncrowded scores 100.
Price · 15/100 · lower is better: What does it cost to enter this market? Live — scored against the other places in view, where expensive to enter scores 0 and cheap to enter scores 100.
Price growth · 20/100 · higher is better: A movement needs the SAME property observed at two different prices. `price_history` holds 12 rows across 12 properties and not one has been seen twice, so there is nothing to difference. Comparing this month's listings with last month's would measure what got listed rather than what things cost, and the two are indistinguishable once printed as a percentage. The video re-sync sweep records a price every time it re-reads a listing, so this fills in on its own — it is the missing factor most likely to arrive without anyone building anything.
Rental yield · 10/100 · higher is better: Yield is annual rent over price, and it needs a rent and a price for comparable property in the same place. There are 12 listings for sale and 0 for rent, so there is no numerator anywhere on the platform. It becomes computable the day rentals are listed — the schema already carries `listing_for`, and nothing else has to change.
Infrastructure · 10/100 · higher is better: There is no points-of-interest dataset on this platform. The gazetteer holds 166,652 places and every one is administrative — country, state, district, city, locality — so there is not a single school, station, hospital or employment row to count. This needs a POI source imported and matched to places: an OpenStreetMap extract (free, and its licence requires an attribution surface this site does not yet have) or a commercial feed. Until then an infrastructure score would be a coloured guess, and somebody choosing a home for the school run is exactly who must not be given one.