Recently, China’s largest real estate agency platform, Lianjia, suddenly hid historical transaction prices of second-hand houses in the Shanghai area from the system, no longer making them accessible to the public. This move has sparked widespread speculation in the market, with many believing it was due to pressure from the authorities. Analysts bluntly stated that China’s real estate data has become so “ugly” that it now requires “closing one’s ears to avoid market panic and prevent a ‘stampede’ effect.”
From August 14th to 15th, several social media influencers and media reports confirmed that when logging into the Lianjia official website or app in Shanghai, users can still access information such as the type, size, and orientation of second-hand properties, but the crucial historical transaction prices are hidden. At the same time, historical transaction properties on the Beike platform also appear as “no transaction price available.”
Shanghai is not an isolated case. Prior to this, major cities and hotspots like Beijing, Guangzhou, Hangzhou, and Nanjing have already hidden second-hand property transaction prices. Lianjia has not provided a positive response to this adjustment yet, further solidifying the belief that this action stems from official “guidelines.”
Well-known Shanghai blogger with over a hundred thousand followers on social media, “Master Mei,” views the hiding of property prices by Lianjia as a significant event in the Chinese real estate industry. He believes this move is extremely unfavorable for Lianjia as the platform’s core value lies in information transparency. However, facing official demands, Lianjia is powerless to resist.
Why would the authorities make such demands? “Master Mei” explained that the data is simply too grim. How grim is it? While the average price data for second-hand houses in China’s top hundred cities for August is not yet available, data from July indicates that the average prices of second-hand houses in 100 of China’s largest cities, including first-tier cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen, as well as second and third-tier cities, dropped by 0.77% from the previous month. While 0.77% may not seem significant at first glance, when this decline persists month after month, it becomes alarming. Thus, the authority’s demand for hiding price information is essentially turning a blind eye to the reality.
According to reports released by reputable institutions like the China Real Estate Index System (CREIS) and the China Index Research Institute, in July 2025, the average price of second-hand housing in one hundred cities fell by 0.77% compared to the previous month. As of June 2025, the prices of second-hand housing in one hundred Chinese cities have been falling for 28 consecutive months on a month-to-month basis, and the decline has extended to 30 straight months on a year-on-year basis.
The downward trend is even more pronounced in third-tier cities. By May 2025, the prices of second-hand housing in third-tier cities had been falling for 37 consecutive months year-on-year, indicating immense downward pressure.
Platforms like Lianjia have been leading the industry due in part to their relatively high data transparency, providing transaction prices as references for both buyers and sellers. However, when this data no longer looks favorable, what was once an “industry tool” becomes a “stabilization hazard.”
“Master Mei” emphasized, “Hiding property prices to prove they are not falling? It’s a joke. A healthy industry should have more abundant, accurate, and real information to promote its healthy development. With sufficient and accurate information, industry practitioners are pushed to earn money through more regular and legitimate means, rather than engaging in deceptive practices due to information asymmetry.”
He further added his personal experience of listing his property on Lianjia and vouched for the accuracy of the information provided by the platform. However, without historical transaction prices, the credibility is now in question.
According to statistics from various industry sources, Lianjia holds a 70% listing market share in Shanghai and about a 25% deal market share.
Financial blogger “Huihu Talks Real Estate” criticized the official approach as foolish. He analyzed that the authorities’ pressure on Lianjia to hide historical transaction prices was first an attempt to reduce market panic. Fearful of a possible “stampede” effect in the market, as continuous price declines might prompt homeowners to sell quickly before prices fall further. Secondly, it aims to prevent market anxiety caused by price fluctuations.
He pointed out that from 2021 to the present, almost every homeowner in Shanghai has incurred losses ranging from hundreds of thousands to millions. Some luxury homes and villas may even result in losses of tens of millions for a single property.
“Real Estate Huihu” highlighted, “Those wanting to buy a house will feel less distressed if they can view historical transaction prices. As prices continue to drop, homeowners, especially those in first-tier cities, will become anxious upon seeing historical transaction prices. By July 2025, the listing volumes in first-tier cities have surged rapidly, while the number of buyers has drastically decreased, leading to significant decreases in transaction prices and amounts. Hence, hiding historical transaction prices doesn’t alleviate anxiety but rather prevents landlords from seeing the actual price declines, deterring panic selling—a form of turning a blind eye to reality.”
Although property prices have disappeared from public platforms, they have not truly vanished. According to several domestic media reports, after communicating with real estate agents, it was revealed that all transaction information is still accessible in their back-end systems.
“Real Estate Huihu” pointed out that the implementation of this policy effectively transitions transparency from public access to information controlled by intermediary agents. He analyzed that agents are eager to provide this “internal data” to sellers as a persuasive tool to negotiate lower prices, with the sole objective of pressuring sellers to reduce prices and earning commission upon successful transactions.
This move indicates that the official “hidden price” measures, while controlling public sentiment, may further exacerbate information asymmetry, regressing property transactions to a more opaque era.