The index changes with who you are
A market that suits a rental-income investor can be wrong for a family, a developer, a lender or a retail brand. Twelve profiles reweight the same evidence into a personalized Market Fit Score. Every weight is shown, editable, resettable and shareable — and what a profile cannot yet measure is named rather than invented.
Stable, sustainable rental cash flow — priced sensibly, with real tenant demand and cheap financing.
Not yet covered (no free global source — never invented): Occupancy, vacancy, lease duration, service charges, management costs, rent-control and eviction law, rental-income tax.
Adjust the weights (8 factors)
Market Fit — ranked for a rental-income investor
| Market | Fit | vs overall rank | Rent-to-price (yield proxy) | Inbound migration | GDP growth | Cheap credit (low rates) | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Dubai United Arab Emirates | 88 | ▲ +3 | 100 | 90 | 72 | 89 | 80 |
| 2Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates | 86 | — | 93 | 88 | 72 | 89 | 78 |
| 3Riyadh Saudi Arabia | 74 | ▲ +5 | 61 | 75 | 69 | 88 | 70 |
| 4Singapore Singapore | 65 | ▼ -1 | 15 | 85 | 48 | 93 | 90 |
| 5Sydney Australia | 61 | ▲ +1 | 18 | 82 | 41 | 91 | 89 |
| 6Toronto Canada | 58 | ▲ +3 | 17 | 88 | 38 | 93 | 88 |
| 7New York United States | 57 | ▼ -2 | 24 | 72 | 36 | 90 | 92 |
| 8Zurich Switzerland | 56 | ▼ -7 | 6 | 78 | 25 | 99 | 92 |
| 9Amsterdam Netherlands | 56 | ▼ -2 | 15 | 72 | 23 | 94 | 90 |
| 10Los Angeles United States | 55 | — | 27 | 66 | 36 | 90 | 90 |
| 11Mumbai India | 55 | ▲ +7 | 15 | 30 | 100 | 86 | 66 |
| 12London United Kingdom | 54 | ▲ +1 | 18 | 70 | 28 | 90 | 88 |
| 13Mexico City Mexico | 54 | ▲ +6 | 33 | 50 | 36 | 79 | 68 |
| 14Berlin Germany | 51 | ▼ -3 | 15 | 68 | 0 | 94 | 89 |
| 15Tokyo Japan | 47 | ▼ -1 | 15 | 40 | 6 | 100 | 90 |
| 16Cairo Egypt | 47 | ▲ +5 | 42 | 35 | 57 | 36 | 60 |
| 17Shanghai China | 46 | ▼ -1 | 3 | 42 | 61 | 94 | 64 |
| 18Paris France | 45 | ▼ -1 | 12 | 62 | 23 | 94 | 88 |
| 19Seoul South Korea | 45 | ▼ -7 | 0 | 38 | 27 | 94 | 86 |
| 20Stockholm Sweden | 44 | ▼ -5 | 6 | 66 | 8 | 96 | 90 |
| 21São Paulo Brazil | 43 | ▼ -1 | 25 | 40 | 43 | 74 | 70 |
| 22Istanbul Turkey | 32 | — | 20 | 55 | 62 | 0 | 62 |
How this profile changed the ranking: weighting toward rent-to-price (yield proxy) and inbound migration moves Mumbai up 7 places versus the site's balanced Overall ranking. A market can rank first here and poorly elsewhere — that is suitability, not popularity.
Same market, every profile
New York scores 82 for a family office / institutional but 54 for a corporate professional — the same market, opposite conclusions, because the two users weight different evidence.
Factors are built only from indicators AGI holds — inflation, unemployment, health, lethal violence, GDP growth and Big Mac figures are live (World Bank / UNODC / OECD / The Economist); the rest are labeled seed. Weights are version-controlled (profiles-1.0.0) and never change silently. Not investment advice — a suitability screen, not a recommendation. Full methodology →