Landlords appear to use stale information when setting rents. Among over 43,000 California rental houses in 2018–2019, those last purchased during 2005–2007 (the peak) rent for 2–3% more than those purchased during 2008–2010 (bust). Neither house nor landlord characteristics explain this “peak-bust rental spread.” To clarify the mechanism, we test cross-sectional predictions from a simple theory of rent-setting. We find empirical support for both reference dependence and distorted beliefs. In the first, monthly payments establish (recurring) reference points, against which gains or losses are measured. In the second, past sales prices distort landlords’ current estimates of house values/rents.

Over the last 20 years, the stock market indicates that value creation has become heavily concentrated in a few headquarter cities. At the same time, firms in value-creating cities have experienced declines in their profitability, because of large increases in wages and rents. Our findings thus highlight the difference between flow-based (e.g., operating profits) and stock-based (e.g., securities prices) indicators of local productivity. Conventional proxies for a city’s appeal to high value-added workers, such as education rates and weather, are positively related to stock market valuations, but negatively related to near-term operating performance.