Capital allocation Tampa Bay
Tampa Bay CRE Capital Allocation 2026
Editorial and financing review: October 1, 2026. Operating figures retain their stated provider, geography and reporting period. A later review date does not make an earlier observation current.
Key takeaway
Tampa Bay offers different investments in household-serving retail, healthcare, logistics and housing after substantial supply growth. Urban offices and hotels need specific tenant or demand evidence.
Storm exposure, insurance, concessions and competing deliveries directly affect income. Higher financing costs require current-NOI debt sizing and cash for slower lease-up rather than a broad Florida growth assumption.
Financing assumptions
The Fed raised its target to 3.75%–4.00% on September 16. The September 30 Treasury close was 5.29% for the 10-year and 5.64% for the 30-year. Source: Federal Reserve FOMC Statement September 16 2026; Source: U.S. Treasury Daily Par Yield Curve September 2026.
Size debt from achieved income and include capital work and carrying reserves. Test a higher borrowing cost, slower stabilization and a wider exit cap rate; improve rent, proceeds or exit assumptions only when property evidence and lender terms support them. See U.S. Commercial Real Estate Outlook Q4 2026 for the common macro scenarios.
Evidence carried forward
The following source-period observations and earlier qualifications remain part of the research record. Current allocation and financing conclusions are stated above.
Tampa Bay is a selective tri-county Gulf Coast allocation, not a generic Sun Belt beta trade. The memo's preferred lanes are premium-node office and mixed-use exposure in Westshore Office Core and Tampa International Airport, Downtown Tampa Channel District and Water Street, and Downtown St. Petersburg and Innovation District; I-4 distribution exposure in East Hillsborough I-4 and Plant City Industrial Corridor; and corridor-specific multifamily / retail in proven household-growth or urban-core nodes. The market deserves capital, but only when Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco are underwritten separately and coastal insurance / flood risk is treated as a first-order cost.
The Pointe Grand Interbay construction loan reinforces the corridor-specific multifamily rule. Even workforce-oriented South Tampa supply needs insurance, rent-to-income, construction-cost, AMI-targeting, and delivery-window checks before it is used as proof of broad Tampa Bay multifamily strength. See Source: Hillpointe Lands 67M Construction Loan for Tampa Apartments.
Connect CRE's reported $125 million construction loan for EDGE Collective II adds a downtown St. Petersburg financing marker. The reported 330-unit, 19,000-SF-retail program and three-year floating-rate loan support project-level capital availability; undisclosed pricing, leverage, total cost, and construction start leave the market-wide supply and operating thesis unchanged. See Source: Connect CRE EDGE Collective II $125M Financing 2026.
C&W's Q2 2026 multifamily table reinforces the same selection rule with current operating evidence. YTD absorption of 2,521 units nearly matched 2,825 deliveries, but effective rent still fell 4.7% year over year and the 8,355-unit pipeline remained material. Downtown Tampa and Downtown St. Petersburg were above 92% stabilized occupancy; East Tampa, South Tampa, and South Pinellas were below 87%. That is evidence for node selection and supply digestion, not a broad Tampa Bay rent-growth call. See Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026.
Structured evidence scope: references below to the legacy structured snapshot describe earlier recorded rows or gaps. Supabase/Postgres is authoritative. This editorial review did not rerun those database counts or imports; verify current row custody, period and source before using them in underwriting.
Question
How should capital allocate across Tampa Bay in 2026: as a broad Florida growth trade, a Gulf Coast income market, an office recovery market, or a node-selected industrial / urban-core allocation?
Allocation Frame
| Bucket | What the market says | Best fit |
|---|---|---|
| Office and urban cores | Westshore is the institutional office decision center; Downtown Tampa / Channel District / Water Street is the urban-core mixed-use story; Downtown St. Petersburg is the smaller Pinellas innovation / waterfront core. C&W Q2 2026 reports 18.7% Tampa Bay vacancy, -41,506 SF current-quarter absorption but +61,527 SF YTD, while CBRE Q2 reports 19.9% vacancy, -96K SF Q2 / -66K SF YTD absorption, $31.63/SF FSG rent, and just 149K SF under construction. The premium-space shortage and Westshore / St Pete performance offset the negative metro print, but these remain separate underwriting regimes, not one Tampa Bay office beta. | Premium office, office-adjacent mixed-use, and connected non-core Class A/B nodes where tenant demand, concessions, parking, and amenity position are proven at the node level. Avoid commodity suburban office framed with Westshore or Class A evidence. |
| Industrial | C&W Q2 2026 shows 126.1M SF, 7.4% vacancy, +766K SF YTD absorption, $10.86/SF weighted net rent, and 1.97M SF under construction with 89% available; CBRE Q2 separately shows 164.09M SF, 7.7% vacancy, +615K SF Q2 / +890K SF YTD absorption, $11.06/SF NNN rent, and 3.86M SF under construction. Marcus adds small-bay context and JLL's Q1 row adds 8.7% vacancy and 2.45M SF under development. The source-family universes diverge, but the common read is product and corridor dispersion: occupied preleases improved Plant City demand, while available pipeline and large-format exposure prevent a broad scarcity call. | I-4 logistics, functional distribution, and selective port-adjacent industrial with verified truck access, dock / clear-height specs, trailer parking, lease-up plan, and tenant demand. Do not use Lakeland / Polk or generic Florida industrial evidence as a Tampa Bay substitute. |
| Pasco / Wesley Chapel growth | Wesley Chapel is the Pasco I-75 household-growth and master-planned retail edge. It is a real growth node, but it is not a proxy for all Pasco County or for Hernando. | Master-planned multifamily, household-services real estate, grocery / power-center retail, and medical / education-adjacent demand where trade-area income, absorption, and supply are proven. |
| Multifamily | Household growth supports the market, but the source stack frames Tampa Bay multifamily as supply-active, operating-cost-sensitive, and now explicitly in a 2026 rebalancing phase. Northmarq's Q1 2026 table shows 8.0% vacancy, $1,687/month rent, 14,997 units under construction, and negative rent movement, while also showing $372M of Q1 sales volume and a 41% permit pullback. Marcus & Millichap's visible 1Q 2026 teaser says Hernando / Pasco still attract residents, while metro population growth slows, second-half 2025 absorption cooled, and delivery pressure varies sharply by submarket. IPA adds the tier split: the cooling was most apparent in Class B/C assets, Class A vacancy declined more sharply in 2025, and all tiers were still in a 5% to 6% vacancy range heading into 2026. | Basis-disciplined multifamily in Westshore / Downtown Tampa adjacency, Downtown St. Petersburg / Clearwater urban-core cases, Brandon / Riverview suburban product, and Wesley Chapel / Pasco master-planned nodes after rent-to-income, concessions, insurance, and pipeline checks. |
| Retail / consumer | C&W Q1 2026 showed 3.8% vacancy, $27.02/SF NNN rent, 1.7% rent growth, -290,843 SF absorption, 818K SF under construction, and $324M of sales volume. Matthews / CoStar separately showed 3.7% vacancy, $26.81/SF rent, 1.1% rent growth, negative roughly 80K SF absorption, 784K SF under construction, $282M sales volume, $273/SF pricing, and a 6.7% cap rate. Marcus & Millichap adds that demand is normalizing and 2025 absorption was the weakest year-long stretch since at least 2007, while small-box single-tenant demand still looks better than multi-tenant and larger-box exposure. | Grocery / necessity centers, high-income household-service retail, small-box service / discount / fitness backfill, and urban-core experiential retail where tenant sales, parking, access, and household support validate the lease economics. Negative absorption keeps the lane corridor-selected rather than full-confidence beta. |
| Hospitality | Marcus & Millichap's 1Q 2026 teaser expects further 2026 occupancy declines after a 300-bp occupancy decline last year, but frames the pattern as normalization after pandemic-era and hurricane-induced demand distortions rather than structural weakening. The source says the metro ranked seventh closest among major markets to its 2019 occupancy benchmark as of early 2026, and it offers a dated Downtown-TIA-Interbay hypothesis from minimal 2025 demand deterioration, scant scheduled 2026 deliveries, anticipated attendees and expanded air service. These comparisons do not reject persistent demand weakness or establish realized bookings, margins or investment superiority. | Downtown / Tampa International Airport / Interbay hotel exposure where booking pace, convention demand, air-service demand, labor, insurance, renovation, and debt basis are proven. Avoid broad Tampa hotel beta or limited-service recovery assumptions without operating statements. |
Where Capital Should Lean In
- Westshore first for office: Westshore is the cleanest Tampa Bay institutional office node because the tenant base, airport access, and financial-services / insurance / regional-HQ pattern are more defensible than broad suburban office.
- Office quality split is now source-backed: Marcus & Millichap's public 1Q 2026 teaser supports the quality-tier filter: Class A improved in 2025, while Class B/C showed little vacancy movement and urban-core lower-tier absorption remained weak. CBRE's Q1 2026 public figure page reinforces that split with a fourth consecutive quarter of positive net absorption, sustained Class A demand, no Q1 deliveries, and two CBD-centric late-2026 projects, while still warning that core availability is being lifted by pending move-outs. Pinellas / Pasco and east-of-core leasing strength are connected-submarket evidence, not a marketwide office recovery call.
- JLL confirms premium-node office is the best office lane: Source: JLL Tampa Bay Office Market Dynamics Q1 2026 reports that Westshore plus the I-75/I-4 corridor generated 207,000 SF of Q1 absorption, Trophy / Class A vacancy tightened to 14.7%, and more than 1M SF of obsolete inventory was removed over the prior year. The investment implication is selective upside in well-located, high-quality assets and conversion-aware basis, not a blanket older-office rebound.
- C&W's Q2 update keeps the gate active: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Office MarketBeat Q2 2026 shows positive YTD absorption but negative current-quarter absorption, 92,530 SF under construction, and sharp submarket dispersion. The later report supports selective premium-node underwriting while keeping commodity office in basis-discipline mode.
- CBRE's Q2 update sharpens the same gate: Source: CBRE Tampa Office Figures Q2 2026 shows negative Q2 and YTD absorption, 19.9% vacancy, and softer $31.63/SF weighted asking rent, but only 149K SF under construction and a strong Westshore / premium-space split. Treat the thin pipeline as a future supply constraint, not proof of current broad recovery.
- Urban-core exposure only where the core is named: Downtown Tampa / Water Street and Downtown St. Petersburg can support mixed-use and residential-adjacent office reads, but each needs its own tenant and demand proof.
- East Hillsborough for industrial conviction: I-4 / Plant City is the durable logistics lane; Brandon / Riverview is better read as suburban household and last-mile context than as the primary industrial thesis.
- Industrial source-family discipline: C&W Q1 2026 supports the industrial lane but also flags near-term vacancy pressure. Plant City and South Tampa are development / lease-up stories; Eastside is the cleaner absorption row; Pinellas is tighter but weaker on absorption.
- Marcus industrial overlay: Marcus & Millichap's 2Q 2026 teaser strengthens the selective recovery read: Port Tampa Bay container traffic was up 2% year over year, 2026 completions may fall to a decade low, and Plant City should see no major deliveries after adding more than 6.0M SF since 2022. The same source keeps underwriting gated because vacancy reached its highest level since 2013 in 2025 and airport-area leasing softened as Tampa International Airport cargo fell by more than 10%.
- JLL industrial overlay: JLL's Q1 2026 row supports emerging stabilization and East Side demand, with three consecutive quarters above 175,000 SF of absorption and 1.3M SF over nine months. It does not remove the gate: vacancy is 8.7%, availability is 11.9%, active construction remains 2.45M SF, and the proposed pipeline is about 21.5M SF.
- CBRE Q2 product overlay: Source: CBRE Tampa Industrial Figures Q2 2026 shows distribution/logistics at +718K SF Q2 absorption, but manufacturing and R&D/flex negative YTD, while buildings over 500K SF carry 13.9% direct vacancy. Underwrite size and tenant function before applying Tampa-wide averages.
- Pasco as a growth edge, not a metro average: Wesley Chapel can support household-services, retail, and selective housing strategies, but capital should not generalize its higher-income growth profile across all Pasco or into Hernando.
- Multifamily recovery remains gated: Northmarq Q4 2025 added the prior Tampa multifamily baseline: 8.0% vacancy, $1,709/month rent, about 5,700 units of 2025 absorption, 8,525 deliveries, 11,815 units under construction, and $185,400/unit median pricing. Source: Northmarq Tampa Multifamily Market Insights Q1 2026 updates the row and makes the operating gate tighter: vacancy was still 8.0% but up 100 bps year over year, asking rent fell to $1,687/month, under-construction units rose to 14,997, and Northmarq forecast 8.4% vacancy by year-end 2026. The constructive part is liquidity and later supply relief because Q1 sales volume reached about $372M and permits fell 41% year over year; the gating part is negative rents, softer employment, high current construction, insurance costs, and corridor-specific delivery timing.
- Yardi's Tampa operating cross-check keeps the gate firm: its July public article reports 93.3% occupancy in April, down 140 bps year over year and below the cited 94.1% national figure; only 0.1% trailing-three-month asking-rent growth through May; 3,128 units added year to date; 16,146 units underway; and $386M of multifamily trades through May. The employment backdrop was also softer, with 4.7% unemployment and 3,000 net jobs lost over the prior 12 months. These are preview-level source-family indicators, not a substitute for the Northmarq or C&W universes. See Source: Yardi Matrix Tampa Multifamily Market Report July 2026.
- IPA class-tier overlay: Source: IPA Tampa-St. Petersburg Multifamily Market Report 1Q 2026 does not change the market's specialist-only / priced-gate posture, but it helps target the gate. Class A showed better vacancy movement in 2025 while Class B/C took more of the absorption-cooling pressure, and Central Tampa / New Tampa-East Pasco remain near-term completion-pressure nodes. Use that as a product-tier and submarket-selection rule, not as a broad Tampa apartment upgrade.
- Retail format matters more than the metro label: C&W Q2 reports 3.8% vacancy, $27.53/SF NNN rent, and -290,441 SF YTD absorption, with general retail positive but neighborhood centers deeply negative. Marcus & Millichap's teaser supports the same caution: tight metro vacancy can coexist with format stress. Price tenant format and backfill depth before using a Tampa-wide growth narrative.
- Hospitality requires matched corridor tests: Source: Marcus & Millichap Tampa-St. Petersburg Hospitality Market Report 1Q 2026 offers a normalization / Downtown-TIA-Interbay hypothesis rather than a tested asset ranking. Tampa Bay Hospitality Market keeps benchmark and forecast scope explicit; Forecast Evaluation and Research Transferability compares temporary unwinding with persistent weakness, Sensitivity and Scenario Analysis tests net capture/displacement, storm interruption, margins and complete funding, and Portfolio Construction and Risk Budgeting compares price, objectives, horizon, cash needs, risk tolerance and feasible investor actions.
Where Discipline Matters
- Boundary discipline: Tampa Bay here means Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco inside the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater MSA branch. Hernando is deferred. Lakeland / Polk, Sarasota / Bradenton, Orlando, and broader Florida evidence can be peer context, not underwriting proof.
- Coastal and insurance risk: Pinellas waterfront, Clearwater, St. Petersburg, and other coastal / flood-exposed assets need explicit insurance, flood, reinsurance, storm-surge, and operating-cost stress. A coastal lifestyle premium is not the same thing as durable NOI.
- Office bifurcation: Westshore, Downtown Tampa, and Downtown St. Petersburg are the investable office conversation. Commodity older office elsewhere needs basis, conversion, or tenant-specific logic rather than a recovery narrative.
- Supply and affordability: Multifamily and retail underwriting should start with corridor-level rent-to-income, pipeline, tenant sales, and household support rather than CBSA growth. Retail source families agree on tight vacancy and limited supply but also show negative Q1 absorption.
- Urban-core multifamily financing: Connect CRE reports a $125 million, three-year floating-rate construction loan for PTM Partners' planned 330-unit, 19,000-SF-retail EDGE Collective II in downtown St. Petersburg. Keep it as a project-level debt event with pricing and leverage undisclosed; it does not resolve Tampa Bay's operating-market supply, rent, or insurance gates. See Source: Connect CRE EDGE Collective II $125M Financing 2026.
Best-Fit Capital
Tampa Bay best fits patient income and selective growth capital that can choose corridors precisely: premium-node office / mixed-use operators, industrial investors focused on I-4 logistics, and retail / multifamily buyers willing to underwrite insurance, supply, and trade areas at the asset level. It is a weaker fit for capital seeking a blanket Florida growth allocation, broad office beta, or coastal multifamily / retail without insurance and flood-cost proof.
USF's Uptown Landing adds a separate institutional campus P3 signal: its nearly $500 million first phase combines a roughly $270 million privately financed/ground-leased district with a roughly $225 million university research facility. The student and affiliate housing, hotel, and retail components have distinct development financing, while USF directly funds the research building and its infrastructure share. This broadens the named education/research and event-destination pipeline but does not change conventional multifamily, hotel, or retail market operating metrics. See Uptown Landing, USF Tampa Campus and Source: USF Uptown Landing Campus P3 2026.
Aventon reportedly paid $16.25M for nearly 20 acres at State Road 56 and Meadow Pointe Boulevard in Wesley Chapel, with plans for a 384-unit apartment community. The land purchase adds a Tampa-area growth-corridor supply and basis marker, but does not establish total development cost, rents, delivery timing, or lease-up performance. See Source: Aventon Moving Ahead on 384-Unit Wesley Chapel Rental Community.
Evidence Gaps
The prior evidence gap is partly closed. the legacy structured snapshot now has dedicated C&W and Matthews Q1 2026 industrial rows, C&W and Matthews Q1 2026 retail rows, and Northmarq Q4 2025 multifamily rows. Office, tenant-credit, lease-economics, corridor-specific tenant sales, current concessions, and asset-level NOI evidence still need source-specific structured imports or property-level records.
- Tampa Bay Market Intelligence 2025
- Source - U.S. Census ACS Greater Tampa Bay Demographic Backfill 2026
- Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Industrial MarketBeat Q1 2026
- Source: Matthews Tampa FL Industrial Market Report Q1 2026
- Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Retail MarketBeat Q1 2026
- Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Retail MarketBeat Q2 2026
- Source: Matthews Tampa FL Retail Market Report Q1 2026
- Source: Northmarq Tampa Multifamily Market Insights Q4 2025
- Source: Northmarq Tampa Multifamily Market Insights Q1 2026
- Source: Yardi Matrix Tampa Multifamily Market Report July 2026
- Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026
- Source: Marcus & Millichap Tampa-St. Petersburg Multifamily Market Report 1Q 2026
- Source: IPA Tampa-St. Petersburg Multifamily Market Report 1Q 2026
- Source: Marcus & Millichap Tampa-St. Petersburg Office Market Report 1Q 2026
- Source: CBRE Tampa Office Figures Q1 2026
- Source: CBRE Tampa Office Figures Q2 2026
- Source: JLL Tampa Bay Office Market Dynamics Q1 2026
- Source: Marcus & Millichap Tampa-St. Petersburg Retail Market Report 1Q 2026
- Source: Marcus & Millichap Tampa-St. Petersburg Hospitality Market Report 1Q 2026
- Source: Marcus & Millichap Tampa-St. Petersburg Industrial Market Report 2Q 2026
- Source: JLL Tampa Bay Industrial Market Dynamics Q1 2026
- Source: CBRE Tampa Industrial Figures Q2 2026
- Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Industrial MarketBeat Q2 2026
- Source: USF Uptown Landing Campus P3 2026
Related Pages
- Analyses Hub
- Tampa Bay Geography Hub
- Tampa Bay
- Tampa Bay Office Market
- Tampa Bay Industrial and Logistics Market
- Tampa Bay Multifamily Market
- EDGE Collective II
- Tampa Bay Retail and Consumer Market
- Tampa Bay Hospitality Market
- Westshore Office Core and Tampa International Airport
- Downtown Tampa Channel District and Water Street
- Downtown St. Petersburg and Innovation District
- East Hillsborough I-4 and Plant City Industrial Corridor
- Wesley Chapel and Pasco I-75 Growth Corridor
- Miami and South Florida CRE Capital Allocation 2026
- Jacksonville CRE Capital Allocation 2026
Conditional submarket rankings — October 24, 2026
Independent review, October 24, 2026. All four comparisons completed claim review. Existing national entries link retail comparisons. The multifamily, industrial, office boards remain reviewed drafts because matching national-parent strategy coverage is absent. The local board keeps its own investor mandate and provider geography. A narrower parent does not extend its posture to every child candidate. See MSAs 11–20 Submarket Rankings for coverage. Published schema status establishes eligibility only; this batch does not publish a shared version.
Question and investor mandate. Which existing assets merit a current-income search over five to seven years? CRET assumes comparable entry-income yields after reserves, no more than 60% loan-to-value and at least 1.35x debt coverage after recurring reserves. These are scenario assumptions, not observed loan terms. The investor can verify leases, renegotiate price, complete repairs and fund ordinary leasing work. Ground-up development, wholesale conversion and unfunded stabilization need separate mandates.
Boundary. Census CBSA 45300 comprises Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco and Hernando. This dated ranking scope supersedes the older tri-county boundary discussion above for this new screen; it does not turn a two-county provider survey into the full MSA. Source-defined districts remain distinct across asset classes. Source: Census Vintage 2025 Top 25 Metro and County Migration Baseline.
Method and uncertainty. Compare current occupied-income support, new competition, demand direction and survey breadth within each posture, then use the explicit adjacent comparisons below. Those comparisons assume comparable reserve-adjusted entry yields, because neither purchase price nor achieved property NOI is observed. A price discount, stronger tenant credit or lower capital burden can reverse any pair. Conviction is provisional 2, or 1 for specialist execution. There is no manufactured historical movement or claim of divergence from consensus. Test flat rents, a 10% net-income decline and a 100-basis-point wider exit cap while funding operating/leasing reserves; these are CRET stress scenarios. Re-rank when two comparable quarters reverse demand, a committed competing project changes supply, a major tenant departs or a verified price/cash-flow comparison overturns the assumed yield equality.
Newer apartment counterevidence. MMG Q3 reports 91.8% occupancy, -2.5% annual rent change and trailing-four-quarter absorption of 6,859 units against 7,609 completions. Its public page does not define county boundaries, stabilization cohort or an explicit rent denominator. This is evidence of reported metro-level improvement alongside rent pressure, not a like-for-like change from C&W Q2 or a refresh of local Q2 figures. The full report is form gated and was not obtained. Source: MMG Tampa Multifamily Market Snapshot Q3 2026
The reused legacy apartment import binds both stock and YTD delivery/absorption metrics to a common Q2 period marked quarter-to-date. The 134-row read-only check verifies values, raw tokens and custody; it does not validate that legacy interval modeling. This comparison follows the printed YTD source headings. No structured metric card is admitted from those ambiguous legacy flow bindings.
Multifamily allocation — October 24
All eleven primary C&W local rows are ranked using Q2 2026, as of June 30. This is a Hillsborough/Pinellas survey of properties with at least 100 units. Stabilized occupancy excludes initial lease-up and buildings delivered in the prior 18 months; effective rent is per unit/month, with affordable-only rents excluded. Pasco is only a secondary county aggregate and is not mixed with local districts; Hernando is absent. Polk is outside the MSA. Deliveries and absorption are YTD, not Q2 alone. The Q3 MMG public snapshot supplies newer context but no comparable local grid. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026
Sourced facts and conditional conclusions. Ranks below are CRET allocation judgments for this mandate. Asking rents and occupancy are not acquisition returns. Price current collected income after concessions, insurance and repairs; fund competing lease-up and debt reserves.
| Rank | Provider district | Posture | Operating evidence | Adjacent comparison or conclusion | Counterevidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Northwest Tampa | selective | 93.5% stabilized occupancy; +63 YTD absorbed; 592 units underway; -4.4% YoY effective rent; Q2 stabilized occupancy: 93.5%; YTD net absorption: +63 units | Northwest leads Downtown Tampa for current income because 592 units underway against 17,076 units of inventory is a smaller pipeline burden than 1,284 against 15,475. Downtown has slightly higher occupancy and much better rent resilience, so price can reverse the pair. | Q2 rent fell 4.4% YoY despite 93.5% stabilized occupancy; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 2 | Downtown Tampa | selective | 93.8% stabilized occupancy; +447 YTD absorbed; 1,284 units underway; -0.9% YoY effective rent; Q2 stabilized occupancy: 93.8%; YTD net absorption: +447 units | Downtown Tampa leads Central Pinellas because its 93.8% occupancy and -0.9% annual rent change show stronger occupied-income support. Its larger relative pipeline requires a greater lease-up reserve. | 1,284 units underway create competition against a 15,475-unit survey; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 3 | Central Pinellas | selective | 93.1% stabilized occupancy; +447 YTD absorbed; 1,209 units underway; -5.3% YoY effective rent; Q2 stabilized occupancy: 93.1%; YTD net absorption: +447 units | Central Pinellas leads Southeast Tampa on higher stabilized occupancy and a smaller pipeline relative to stock: 1,209/30,470 versus 1,709/28,803. Southeast has the smaller annual rent decline. | Q2 rent fell 5.3% YoY; 874 units were delivered YTD; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 4 | Southeast Tampa | selective | 92.4% stabilized occupancy; +394 YTD absorbed; 1,709 units underway; -4.5% YoY effective rent; Q2 stabilized occupancy: 92.4%; YTD net absorption: +394 units | Southeast Tampa leads North Pinellas because higher occupancy and the larger operating survey support a broader current-income search. Its greater pipeline and deliveries exceeding absorption require a stronger reserve. | 532 YTD deliveries exceeded 394 absorbed units; 1,709 more underway; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 5 | North Pinellas | selective | 91.7% stabilized occupancy; +125 YTD absorbed; 404 units underway; -4.4% YoY effective rent; Q2 stabilized occupancy: 91.7%; YTD net absorption: +125 units | North Pinellas leads Downtown St. Petersburg because 404 units underway against 11,877 units is less competing supply than 897 against 6,158. Downtown has stronger occupancy and rent resilience; a better net yield can reverse this preference. | Q2 occupancy is 91.7%; effective rent fell 4.4% YoY; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 6 | Downtown St. Petersburg | selective | 92.6% stabilized occupancy; +167 YTD absorbed; 897 units underway; -0.9% YoY effective rent; Q2 stabilized occupancy: 92.6%; YTD net absorption: +167 units | Downtown St. Petersburg leads West Tampa because 92.6% occupancy and a -0.9% annual rent change support existing income more strongly. Its unusually large pipeline relative to stock must be funded in price. | 897 units underway against 6,158 existing units can pressure concessions; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 7 | West Tampa | tactical | 90.7% stabilized occupancy; +272 YTD absorbed; 385 units underway; -6.6% YoY effective rent; Q2 stabilized occupancy: 90.7%; YTD net absorption: +272 units | West Tampa leads North Tampa because higher occupancy and positive YTD absorption provide a stronger income base despite its steeper rent decline. Both need a basis that carries current rent pressure. | Q2 effective rent fell 6.6% YoY; occupancy is only 90.7%; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 8 | North Tampa | tactical | 89.9% stabilized occupancy; -195 YTD absorbed; 374 units underway; -6.0% YoY effective rent; Q2 survey inventory: 30,651 units; 374 units underway against 30,651 units of inventory | North Tampa leads South Tampa on higher occupancy and a smaller pipeline relative to stock. Its negative YTD absorption prevents a broad recovery assumption. | 195-unit YTD occupancy loss accompanies a 6.0% annual rent decline; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 9 | South Tampa | tactical | 86.7% stabilized occupancy; +438 YTD absorbed; 683 units underway; -6.4% YoY effective rent; Q2 survey inventory: 10,569 units; YTD net absorption: +438 units | South Tampa leads South Pinellas because 86.7% occupancy is higher and 438 units of YTD absorption exceeded 324 deliveries. Both rows require funded concessions and operating reserves. | Q2 occupancy is 86.7%; effective rent fell 6.4% YoY; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 10 | South Pinellas | tactical | 84.8% stabilized occupancy; +167 YTD absorbed; 818 units underway; -4.7% YoY effective rent; Q2 survey inventory: 9,902 units; YTD net absorption: +167 units | South Pinellas leads East Tampa because it has higher occupancy, a less severe rent decline and a much larger operating survey. Its 818-unit pipeline keeps this a lease-up and price-sensitive search. | Q2 occupancy is 84.8% with 818 units under construction; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
| 11 | East Tampa | specialist | 82.3% stabilized occupancy; +196 YTD absorbed; 0 units underway; -8.2% YoY effective rent; YTD net absorption: +196 units; Q2 reports zero units under construction | East Tampa is a specialist watchlist for an operator able to fund very weak current occupancy. Positive YTD absorption and no reported construction do not establish stabilized income. | Q2 occupancy is 82.3%; effective rent fell 8.2% YoY; Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves |
Conditions that reverse the call. Price current collected income after concessions, insurance and repairs; fund competing lease-up and debt reserves. Price must fund concessions, storm insurance, repairs and lease-up reserves. Re-rank from verified property cash flow, lease rollover and competing deliveries; no return target is inferred from rent levels. The common mandate and stress tests apply to every row. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026
Positive operating support for the presentation fields. Northwest Tampa: Q2 stabilized occupancy: 93.5%; YTD net absorption: +63 units. Downtown Tampa: Q2 stabilized occupancy: 93.8%; YTD net absorption: +447 units. Central Pinellas: Q2 stabilized occupancy: 93.1%; YTD net absorption: +447 units. Southeast Tampa: Q2 stabilized occupancy: 92.4%; YTD net absorption: +394 units. North Pinellas: Q2 stabilized occupancy: 91.7%; YTD net absorption: +125 units. Downtown St. Petersburg: Q2 stabilized occupancy: 92.6%; YTD net absorption: +167 units. West Tampa: Q2 occupancy 90.7%, above North Tampa at 89.9%; YTD net absorption: +272 units. North Tampa: Q2 occupancy 89.9%, above South Tampa at 86.7%; Smaller pipeline relative to stock than South Tampa: 374/30,651 vs 683/10,569. South Tampa: Q2 occupancy 86.7%, above South Pinellas at 84.8%; YTD net absorption: +438 units. South Pinellas: Q2 occupancy 84.8%, above East Tampa at 82.3%; YTD net absorption: +167 units. East Tampa: YTD net absorption: +196 units; Q2 reports zero units under construction. These reported positives do not remove the counterevidence or acquisition gate in the table.
Industrial allocation — October 24
All seven provider districts are ranked using Q3 2026, as of September 30. The survey is Hillsborough/Pinellas only; Pasco and Hernando are gaps. Absorption, leasing and completions are YTD; rents are annual weighted net asks. Product-specific warehouse/manufacturing/office-service rows are not interchangeable. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026
Sourced facts and conditional conclusions. Ranks below are CRET allocation judgments for this mandate. Asking rents and occupancy are not acquisition returns. Verify achieved net income, tenant credit and rollover; price vacancy, building work and competing deliveries.
| Rank | Provider district | Posture | Operating evidence | Adjacent comparison or conclusion | Counterevidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | North Pinellas | selective | 1.9% vacancy; -7,958 SF YTD absorption; 68,000 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 1.9%; Q3 active construction: 68,000 SF | North Pinellas leads Westside on much lower vacancy, despite a small YTD occupancy loss and 68,000 SF of construction. Westside has greater leasing depth and no active construction; a stronger yield can reverse this pair. | YTD absorption is -7,958 SF; 68,000 SF remains underway; Price must fund rollover, downtime, tenant work and building repairs |
| 2 | Westside | selective | 5.8% vacancy; +19,458 SF YTD absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 5.8%; YTD net absorption: +19,458 SF | Westside leads South Pinellas because positive YTD absorption and 610,777 SF of new leasing give a stronger demand signal. South Pinellas is tighter, so current cash flow still controls the price comparison. | 5.8% vacancy exceeds South Pinellas 3.8%; asking rent is not achieved NOI; Price must fund rollover, downtime, tenant work and building repairs |
| 3 | South Pinellas | selective | 3.8% vacancy; -4,522 SF YTD absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 3.8%; Q3 active construction: 0 SF | South Pinellas leads Gateway-Mid Pinellas on lower vacancy and zero construction. Its smaller survey and only 37,766 SF of YTD leasing limit confidence in repeatable tenant demand. | YTD absorption is -4,522 SF and new leasing is only 37,766 SF; Price must fund rollover, downtime, tenant work and building repairs |
| 4 | Gateway-Mid Pinellas | selective | 7.9% vacancy; +66,638 SF YTD absorption; 40,000 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 7.9%; YTD net absorption: +66,638 SF | Gateway-Mid Pinellas leads Plant City for current income because vacancy is lower and positive YTD absorption supports an occupied base. Plant City has much stronger absorption and no construction; price can reverse the preference. | 7.9% vacancy remains after 472,203 SF of YTD completions; Price must fund rollover, downtime, tenant work and building repairs |
| 5 | Plant City | tactical | 11.1% vacancy; +1,094,908 SF YTD absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 11.1%; YTD net absorption: +1,094,908 SF | Plant City leads Eastside because 1,094,908 SF of YTD absorption and no reported construction favor supply digestion. Its higher 11.1% vacancy still needs a lower basis and funded downtime. | 11.1% vacancy remains despite 1,094,908 SF of YTD absorption; Price must fund rollover, downtime, tenant work and building repairs |
| 6 | Eastside | tactical | 8.3% vacancy; -386,077 SF YTD absorption; 1,165,008 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 8.3%; Q3 active construction: 1,165,008 SF | Eastside leads South Tampa because its 8.3% vacancy is far lower and its leasing survey is much deeper. Negative absorption and 1,165,008 SF under construction require a basis discount. | YTD absorption is -386,077 SF with 1,165,008 SF underway; Price must fund rollover, downtime, tenant work and building repairs |
| 7 | South Tampa | specialist | 39.2% vacancy; -96,004 SF YTD absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 reports zero SF under construction; YTD new leasing: 54,846 SF | South Tampa requires specialist lease-up execution and a price that can carry the 39.2% vacancy. Zero construction does not absorb the existing 404,772 SF of YTD completions. | 39.2% vacancy and -96,004 SF YTD absorption pressure current income; Price must fund rollover, downtime, tenant work and building repairs |
Conditions that reverse the call. Verify achieved net income, tenant credit and rollover; price vacancy, building work and competing deliveries. Price must fund rollover, downtime, tenant work and building repairs. Re-rank from verified property cash flow, lease rollover and competing deliveries; no return target is inferred from rent levels. The common mandate and stress tests apply to every row. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026
Positive operating support for the presentation fields. North Pinellas: Lowest selected Q3 vacancy: 1.9%; YTD new leasing: 206,062 SF. Westside: YTD net absorption: +19,458 SF; YTD new leasing: 610,777 SF. South Pinellas: Q3 vacancy 3.8%, below Gateway-Mid Pinellas at 7.9%; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. Gateway-Mid Pinellas: YTD net absorption: +66,638 SF; YTD new leasing: 748,173 SF. Plant City: YTD net absorption: +1,094,908 SF; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. Eastside: Q3 vacancy 8.3%, below South Tampa at 39.2%; YTD new leasing: 1,519,235 SF. South Tampa: Q3 reports zero SF under construction; YTD new leasing: 54,846 SF. These reported positives do not remove the counterevidence or acquisition gate in the table.
Office allocation — October 24
All fourteen provider districts are ranked using Q3 2026, as of September 30. The survey covers Hillsborough/Pinellas only; Pasco and Hernando remain gaps. Current-quarter and YTD absorption are separate. Rents are full-service USD/SF asking quotes with no stated payment interval, with direct and overall bases kept distinct. Small districts are kept visible with explicit survey-size and demand limitations. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Office MarketBeat Q3 2026
Sourced facts and conditional conclusions. Ranks below are CRET allocation judgments for this mandate. Asking rents and occupancy are not acquisition returns. Price current lease income after funded tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work.
| Rank | Provider district | Posture | Operating evidence | Adjacent comparison or conclusion | Counterevidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Westshore | selective | 14.9% vacancy; +107,890 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 net absorption: +107,890 SF; YTD new leasing: 579,310 SF | Westshore leads St. Pete CBD because +107,890 SF quarterly absorption, +266,168 SF YTD and 579,310 SF new leasing give the strongest broad demand support in the selected grid. St. Pete CBD is tighter. | 14.9% vacancy still needs funded tenant improvements and downtime; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 2 | St. Pete CBD | selective | 10.5% vacancy; -6,492 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 10.5%; YTD net absorption: +11,931 SF | St. Pete CBD leads Mid Pinellas/Gateway on lower vacancy and positive YTD absorption. Its negative current quarter and smaller survey prevent treating the lower vacancy as broad recovery. | Q3 absorption is -6,492 SF despite positive YTD absorption; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 3 | Mid Pinellas/Gateway | selective | 17.5% vacancy; +3,211 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 17.5%; Q3 net absorption: +3,211 SF | Mid Pinellas/Gateway leads Countryside on slightly lower vacancy, greater survey breadth and 175,913 SF of YTD new leasing. Both have positive quarter and YTD absorption with no construction. | 17.5% vacancy requires leasing capital even with positive absorption; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 4 | Countryside | selective | 17.9% vacancy; +15,110 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 17.9%; Q3 net absorption: +15,110 SF | Countryside leads Hyde Park because 15,110 SF of quarterly absorption and 41,989 SF of YTD new leasing provide a broader current demand signal. Hyde Park is tighter but has a much smaller survey. | 17.9% vacancy remains in an 845,962-SF operating survey; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 5 | Hyde Park | selective | 10.0% vacancy; +0 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 10.0%; Q3 net absorption: +0 SF | Hyde Park leads Southwest because positive 6,324 SF YTD absorption and 12,842 SF of new leasing provide more demand evidence. Southwest is tighter but its survey and leasing are substantially smaller. | A 257,253-SF survey and zero Q3 absorption limit the demand signal; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 6 | Southwest | selective | 7.6% vacancy; +0 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 7.6%; Q3 net absorption: +0 SF | Southwest leads South St. Petersburg because zero quarter/YTD absorption avoids the latter occupancy losses, although vacancy is higher. Its 143,447-SF survey and 1,030 SF new leasing make this preference fragile. | Only 1,030 SF of YTD new leasing; Class A rent is unavailable; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 7 | South St. Petersburg | selective | 3.9% vacancy; -6,985 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 3.9%; Q3 active construction: 0 SF | South St. Petersburg leads North Pinellas on much lower vacancy and some reported new leasing. Its larger quarter/YTD occupancy losses require greater rollover reserves. | Q3 absorption is -6,985 SF and YTD absorption is -7,824 SF; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 8 | North Pinellas | selective | 14.1% vacancy; -2,070 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 14.1%; Q3 active construction: 0 SF | North Pinellas leads Tampa CBD on lower vacancy and a smaller proportional YTD occupancy loss. A printed zero for new leasing limits the confidence of that preference. | YTD new leasing is zero; absorption is negative in Q3 and YTD; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 9 | Tampa CBD | tactical | 15.4% vacancy; -15,139 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 15.4%; Q3 active construction: 0 SF | Tampa CBD leads I-75 Corridor for existing income because vacancy is lower despite negative absorption. I-75 has stronger current demand, so a better reserve-adjusted yield can reverse the pair. | Q3 absorption is -15,139 SF and YTD absorption is -57,290 SF; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 10 | I-75 Corridor | tactical | 23.3% vacancy; +64,954 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 net absorption: +64,954 SF; YTD new leasing: 312,741 SF | I-75 Corridor leads Clearwater Downtown because +64,954 SF quarterly and +56,697 SF YTD absorption, plus the larger leasing base, favor an operator-funded backfill search. Its 23.3% vacancy needs a discount. | 23.3% vacancy requires funded tenant work, downtime and rollover; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 11 | Clearwater Downtown | tactical | 14.7% vacancy; -2,108 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 14.7%; Q3 active construction: 0 SF | Clearwater Downtown leads Bayside on much lower vacancy. Negative quarter and YTD absorption leave the preference dependent on price and current tenant income. | YTD absorption is -27,556 SF in a 478,049-SF operating survey; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 12 | Bayside | tactical | 27.3% vacancy; +46,609 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 net absorption: +46,609 SF; YTD new leasing: 100,146 SF | Bayside leads Northwest because positive quarter and YTD absorption support backfill despite slightly higher vacancy. Neither has a current-income case without a price and lease-capital allowance. | 27.3% vacancy remains despite 46,609 SF of quarterly absorption; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 13 | Northwest | tactical | 27.1% vacancy; +4,500 SF Q3 absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 net absorption: +4,500 SF; YTD new leasing: 116,935 SF | Northwest remains ahead of specialist Ybor City for a funded backfill mandate because it has no construction and a larger operating survey. Its 27.1% vacancy and negative YTD absorption need a deep discount. | 27.1% vacancy and -53,826 SF YTD absorption weaken current income; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
| 14 | Ybor City | specialist | 23.7% vacancy; +2,450 SF Q3 absorption; 98,570 SF underway; Q3 net absorption: +2,450 SF; YTD net absorption: +3,708 SF | Ybor City requires specialist execution because 98,570 SF under construction is large against its 479,788-SF stock while vacancy is 23.7%. High asking rents do not prove acquired income. | 23.7% vacancy plus 98,570 SF underway can absorb scarce lease-up capital; Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work |
Conditions that reverse the call. Price current lease income after funded tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work. Price must fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime and building work. Re-rank from verified property cash flow, lease rollover and competing deliveries; no return target is inferred from rent levels. The common mandate and stress tests apply to every row. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Office MarketBeat Q3 2026
Positive operating support for the presentation fields. Westshore: Q3 net absorption: +107,890 SF; YTD new leasing: 579,310 SF. St. Pete CBD: Q3 vacancy 10.5%, below Mid Pinellas/Gateway at 17.5%; YTD net absorption: +11,931 SF. Mid Pinellas/Gateway: Q3 net absorption: +3,211 SF; YTD net absorption: +25,832 SF. Countryside: Q3 net absorption: +15,110 SF; YTD net absorption: +5,788 SF. Hyde Park: YTD net absorption: +6,324 SF; YTD new leasing: 12,842 SF. Southwest: Q3 vacancy 7.6%, below the 18.1% survey total; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. South St. Petersburg: Lowest selected Q3 vacancy: 3.9%; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. North Pinellas: Q3 vacancy 14.1%, below Tampa CBD at 15.4%; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. Tampa CBD: Q3 vacancy 15.4%, below I-75 Corridor at 23.3%; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. I-75 Corridor: Q3 net absorption: +64,954 SF; YTD net absorption: +56,697 SF. Clearwater Downtown: Q3 vacancy 14.7%, below Bayside at 27.3%; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. Bayside: Q3 net absorption: +46,609 SF; YTD net absorption: +36,736 SF. Northwest: Q3 net absorption: +4,500 SF; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. Ybor City: Q3 net absorption: +2,450 SF; YTD net absorption: +3,708 SF. These reported positives do not remove the counterevidence or acquisition gate in the table.
Retail allocation — October 24
All fifteen provider districts are ranked using Q3 2026, as of September 30. The report also includes Pasco and Hernando county rows, but these are different units of comparison and stay context rather than extra local candidates. Eastern Outlying is part of the Hillsborough table, not Polk. The page 3 geographic table gives 3.7% survey vacancy versus 3.6% in page 1 prose; the table and its printed vacant/stock ratio govern here. Product rows overlap geography: neighborhood centers at 6.2% vacancy and -490,437 SF YTD absorption cannot inherit the 3.7% aggregate. Rents are NNN USD/SF asking quotes with no stated payment interval; absorption is YTD. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Retail MarketBeat Q3 2026
Sourced facts and conditional conclusions. Ranks below are CRET allocation judgments for this mandate. Asking rents and occupancy are not acquisition returns. Verify tenant sales, credit and co-tenancy; price anchor rollover, roof costs, insurance and funded backfill.
| Rank | Provider district | Posture | Operating evidence | Adjacent comparison or conclusion | Counterevidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | East Tampa | selective | 1.2% vacancy; +139,632 SF YTD absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 1.2%; YTD net absorption: +139,632 SF | East Tampa leads South Tampa because vacancy is lower, YTD absorption is stronger and no construction is reported. Product and tenant-sales tests still govern an individual center. | The geographic 1.2% vacancy does not establish neighborhood-center performance; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 2 | South Tampa | selective | 1.4% vacancy; +42,734 SF YTD absorption; 36,616 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 1.4%; YTD net absorption: +42,734 SF | South Tampa leads Southeast Hillsborough on lower vacancy and a smaller construction burden relative to stock. Southeast has much stronger YTD absorption, so a better net yield can reverse this pair. | 36,616 SF underway and unobserved tenant sales qualify 1.4% vacancy; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 3 | Southeast Hillsborough | selective | 2.5% vacancy; +155,274 SF YTD absorption; 111,591 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 2.5%; YTD net absorption: +155,274 SF | Southeast Hillsborough leads Westshore because +155,274 SF YTD absorption favors a broader occupied-space demand signal. Its 111,591-SF pipeline is materially larger relative to stock and must be funded in price. | 111,591 SF underway against 4,087,851 SF creates future competition; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 4 | Westshore | selective | 1.7% vacancy; -36,070 SF YTD absorption; 22,960 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 1.7%; Q3 active construction: 22,960 SF | Westshore leads Downtown Tampa on lower vacancy and a smaller construction burden relative to inventory. Its negative absorption and higher asking rent keep purchase basis decisive. | YTD absorption is -36,070 SF despite only 1.7% vacancy; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 5 | Downtown Tampa | selective | 3.5% vacancy; +55,189 SF YTD absorption; 28,000 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 3.5%; YTD net absorption: +55,189 SF | Downtown Tampa leads Eastern Outlying because +55,189 SF YTD absorption provides better current demand evidence despite higher vacancy. Its smaller survey and larger relative pipeline weaken that advantage. | 28,000 SF underway against a 2,199,238-SF survey can affect small nodes; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 6 | Eastern Outlying | selective | 2.8% vacancy; -6,036 SF YTD absorption; 13,600 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 2.8%; Q3 active construction: 13,600 SF | Eastern Outlying leads Bayside because its YTD occupancy loss is much smaller relative to stock and annual rent growth is higher. Bayside is tighter and has no active construction. | YTD absorption is -6,036 SF with 13,600 SF underway; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 7 | Bayside | selective | 2.2% vacancy; -64,549 SF YTD absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 2.2%; Q3 active construction: 0 SF | Bayside leads Mid-Pinellas on lower current vacancy and zero construction. Its negative absorption is counterevidence; a higher yield or stronger tenant sales can reverse the preference. | YTD absorption is -64,549 SF despite 2.2% vacancy; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 8 | Mid-Pinellas | selective | 3.9% vacancy; +26,166 SF YTD absorption; 2,683 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 3.9%; YTD net absorption: +26,166 SF | Mid-Pinellas leads South Pinellas on lower vacancy and a much smaller construction burden relative to stock. South Pinellas has stronger YTD absorption, so price and lease quality remain decisive. | 3.9% vacancy includes formats with weaker backfill and unobserved tenant sales; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 9 | South Pinellas | selective | 4.2% vacancy; +81,710 SF YTD absorption; 46,389 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 4.2%; YTD net absorption: +81,710 SF | South Pinellas leads Downtown Clearwater because +81,710 SF YTD absorption and the much larger survey provide a stronger current-demand screen. Downtown Clearwater is tighter and has little construction. | 46,389 SF is underway and 4.2% vacancy still needs format-specific checks; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 10 | Downtown Clearwater | selective | 3.6% vacancy; -7,134 SF YTD absorption; 758 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 3.6%; Q3 active construction: 758 SF | Downtown Clearwater leads Northwest Tampa because its smaller YTD occupancy loss and slightly lower vacancy favor existing income. Its small survey makes a single tenant event material. | YTD absorption is -7,134 SF within a 1,403,770-SF operating survey; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 11 | Northwest Tampa | tactical | 3.7% vacancy; -169,707 SF YTD absorption; 5,400 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 3.7%; Q3 active construction: 5,400 SF | Northwest Tampa leads Gateway because vacancy is lower and the larger survey provides broader lease comparables. Its -169,707 SF YTD absorption requires a funded backfill and price allowance. | YTD absorption is -169,707 SF despite 3.7% vacancy; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 12 | Gateway | tactical | 4.3% vacancy; -22,731 SF YTD absorption; 0 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 4.3%; Q3 active construction: 0 SF | Gateway leads Northeast Tampa because its smaller proportional YTD occupancy loss and zero construction better suit funded backfill. Northeast is tighter, so verified tenant income can reverse this pair. | YTD absorption is -22,731 SF with 4.3% vacancy; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 13 | Northeast Tampa | tactical | 3.9% vacancy; -128,917 SF YTD absorption; 77,175 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 3.9%; Q3 active construction: 77,175 SF | Northeast Tampa leads North Pinellas on lower vacancy despite a larger proportional YTD loss. Its 77,175-SF construction pipeline requires a lease-up allowance. | YTD absorption is -128,917 SF with 77,175 SF underway; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 14 | North Pinellas | tactical | 5.8% vacancy; -89,934 SF YTD absorption; 41,785 SF underway; Q3 vacancy: 5.8%; Q3 active construction: 41,785 SF | North Pinellas leads specialist Downtown St. Petersburg on lower vacancy and a much larger survey. Negative absorption and future supply require a discount and funded rollover. | 5.8% vacancy, -89,934 SF YTD absorption and 41,785 SF underway; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
| 15 | Downtown St. Petersburg | specialist | 11.3% vacancy; +39,678 SF YTD absorption; 0 SF underway; YTD net absorption: +39,678 SF; Q3 reports zero SF under construction | Downtown St. Petersburg needs specialist tenant backfill at a basis that carries 11.3% vacancy. Positive YTD absorption and no construction do not establish durable center-level cash flow. | 11.3% vacancy and unobserved tenant sales leave substantial backfill risk; Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill |
Conditions that reverse the call. Verify tenant sales, credit and co-tenancy; price anchor rollover, roof costs, insurance and funded backfill. Price must fund weak tenant sales, co-tenancy loss, roof costs and backfill. Re-rank from verified property cash flow, lease rollover and competing deliveries; no return target is inferred from rent levels. The common mandate and stress tests apply to every row. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Retail MarketBeat Q3 2026
Positive operating support for the presentation fields. East Tampa: Lowest selected Q3 vacancy: 1.2%; YTD net absorption: +139,632 SF. South Tampa: Q3 vacancy 1.4%, below Southeast Hillsborough at 2.5%; YTD net absorption: +42,734 SF. Southeast Hillsborough: YTD net absorption: +155,274 SF; Annual asking-rent growth: +3.2%. Westshore: Q3 vacancy 1.7%, below Downtown Tampa at 3.5%; Annual asking-rent growth: +2.4%. Downtown Tampa: YTD net absorption: +55,189 SF; Annual asking-rent growth: +2.3%. Eastern Outlying: Q3 vacancy 2.8%, below the 3.7% survey total; Annual asking-rent growth: +3.0%. Bayside: Q3 vacancy 2.2%, below Mid-Pinellas at 3.9%; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. Mid-Pinellas: YTD net absorption: +26,166 SF; Annual asking-rent growth: +2.1%. South Pinellas: YTD net absorption: +81,710 SF; Annual asking-rent growth: +2.1%. Downtown Clearwater: Q3 vacancy 3.6%, below the 3.7% survey total; Annual asking-rent growth: +1.5%. Northwest Tampa: Q3 vacancy 3.7%, below Gateway at 4.3%; Annual asking-rent growth: +2.6%. Gateway: Q3 reports zero SF under construction; Annual asking-rent growth: +2.2%. Northeast Tampa: Q3 vacancy 3.9%, below North Pinellas at 5.8%; Annual asking-rent growth: +2.7%. North Pinellas: Q3 vacancy 5.8%, below Downtown St. Petersburg at 11.3%; Annual asking-rent growth: +2.7%. Downtown St. Petersburg: YTD net absorption: +39,678 SF; Q3 reports zero SF under construction. These reported positives do not remove the counterevidence or acquisition gate in the table.
Sources
-
Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Office MarketBeat Q3 2026
-
Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026
-
Source: Cushman & Wakefield Tampa Bay Retail MarketBeat Q3 2026
-
Source: MMG Tampa Multifamily Market Snapshot Q3 2026
-
Source: Federal Reserve FOMC Statement September 16 2026
-
Source: U.S. Treasury Daily Par Yield Curve September 2026
-
Source: Connect CRE EDGE Collective II $125M Financing 2026