For most people, buying a house is one of the most significant investment decisions of their lifetimes. Economists have mainly focused on the consumption aspects of this process. For example, a typical model in urban economics might frame the decision of where to live as a discrete choice over a bundle of housing and neighborhood attributes such as location, square footage, schooling options, and crime levels. The investment side of the problem has received considerably less attention, a surprising omission since housing assets comprise approximately two-thirds of the average American household’s financial portfolio, serve an important role in saving for retirement and, as has become increasingly apparent, can be quite risky. This paper views housing markets from an asset-pricing perspective, using finance theory to relate the risk premium of a housing asset (the difference between its expected return and the return for a risk-free investment) to its exposure to risk. As usual in finance, what matters for the risk premium of a housing asset is its exposure to systematic risk, not idiosyncratic risk. In our model, there are two forms of systematic risk to which housing assets are exposed: national risk (which is common to houses everywhere) and local risk (which affects all houses within a given metropolitan area, but nowhere else). Houses are said to be of the same type h if they are located in the same metropolitan area and have the same exposure to systematic risk. Our main conclusions are that (1) houses of every type face a common set of risk prices ( for the national risk and m for the local risk specific to metropolitan area m) that, together with appropriate measures of exposure to risk,