Austin 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

Austin is a selective recovery market with substantial apartment and industrial supply and highly uneven office demand. Favor assets whose basis, tenants and location support a hold through the remaining lease-up.

Manufacturing and technology demand create opportunities, but they do not clear vacant space automatically. Higher financing costs make the timing of achieved rents, tenant occupancy and utility delivery central to the equity case.

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.

Updated operating and research evidence

C&W’s Q2 industrial report recorded 22.3% vacancy and 792,442 SF of quarterly absorption. Its office report recorded 26.9% vacancy and −41,633 SF quarterly absorption. Those provider-defined rows support a selective supply-recovery case, with office still losing occupied space; neither establishes a market-wide rent rebound. Preserve full-service office and net industrial rent bases separately.

Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q2 2026; Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office 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.

Legacy thesis inputs: figures supported only by the legacy market thesis, research-sprint synthesis or earlier structured snapshot remain dated or unverified inputs. They do not establish current cap rates, rent growth, occupancy, feasible leverage or expected returns. The current investment case requires source- and property-level confirmation.

Question

How should capital read Austin in 2026: as a recovery market, a corridor-specific growth market, or a place where only the best basis-reset assets deserve fresh money?

Allocation Frame

Airport Logistics Center Sale Offering | September 2026

Dalfen has engaged JLL to market the two-building Airport Logistics Center at 6106 Ross Road after Four Hands expanded its requirements to just over 800,000 SF. Connect CRE reports the facility was 100% occupied and the tenant's weighted-average lease term was 5.1 years. Dalfen's development page gives an original 801,840-SF project program and Q2 2024 completion; no current exact marketed area, asking price, income, or closed transaction was verified. Treat this as an asset-specific sale offering with a reported full-occupancy snapshot, not a sale comp or evidence that Austin's broader industrial oversupply has cleared. See Airport Logistics Center (Austin) and Source: Dalfen Markets Airport Logistics Center After Four Hands Expansion.

What Makes Austin Useful

• Austin still has the strongest long-duration demand story in Texas because of tech, talent, and high-income household formation.
• The metro's best corridors are materially different from the weak ones, which lets disciplined capital pick its spots.
• Partners' Q1 2026 Austin office report adds the current office caveat: headline absorption turned positive by 1.08M SF, but Partners says the shift was driven by the former 3M campus transaction and would have remained negative without it. That supports reuse / conversion / basis-reset discipline more than a broad office recovery upgrade. See Source: Partners Austin Office Q1 2026 Quarterly Market Report.
• CBRE's Q1 2026 Austin office figures support the same source-scoped caveat: tenant demand was real at 4.2M SF, Q1 leasing was 713K SF, and new supply was limited to 575K SF under construction, but 26.4% overall vacancy and even higher Class A / prime vacancy keep office in a selection and basis lane. See Source: CBRE Austin Office Figures Q1 2026.
• CBRE's Q2 2026 Austin office figures show the stabilization is real but narrow: Q2 absorption reached 50K SF and YTD absorption 324K SF, while 873K SF of leasing and a 703K-SF pipeline support the supply-discipline read. The 23.4% vacancy rate, 24.7% Class A vacancy, and East / Southwest losses keep the allocation lane selective. See Source: CBRE Austin Office Figures Q2 2026.
• JLL's Q2 2026 Austin office report adds a separate source-family calibration: 64,525 SF of Q2 absorption, 25.8% vacancy, 3.1% sublease vacancy, $53.76/SF overall direct asking rent, $60.66/SF Class A direct rent, 1.67M SF under construction, and 54.9% preleasing. The positive-absorption run is constructive, but Waterline's fully unleased 715,005 SF and large-block tenant concentration keep the allocation case in a selective stabilization / basis-reset lane. See Source: JLL Austin Office Market Dynamics Q2 2026.
• Matthews' Q2 2026 Austin medical-office article supports a separate healthcare allocation lane: positive absorption, 10.3% vacancy, limited construction, and provider growth toward Cedar Park, Round Rock, and Georgetown. The article's unresolved rent conflict and absent numeric cap rate keep this at market-screening depth; asset selection still turns on tenant credit, service line, referral network, lease structure, and specialized buildout. See Austin Medical Office Market and Source: Matthews Austin TX Medical Office Market Report Q2 2026.
• Industrial demand is real even if the current pipeline is mis-timed.
• CBRE's Q1 2026 figures support that nuance: 385,000 SF of positive net absorption and 3.2M SF of leasing activity show demand, while a fifth consecutive vacancy increase, 6.1M SF development pipeline, and $0.19/SF QoQ asking-rent decline show tenant leverage and supply pressure.
• Matthews' Q1 2026 Austin industrial page sharpens the same point from another broker source family: 14.5% vacancy, 678,000 SF of absorption, -1.1% rent growth, 15.3M SF under construction, and 2.4M SF delivered keep the industrial lane investable only with corridor, tenant-function, and basis discipline. The page's by-the-numbers panel carries a Q4 2025 label despite Q1 2026 title / narrative framing, so use it as source-scoped corroboration, not a blended market average. See Source: Matthews Austin TX Industrial Market Report Q1 2026.
• Partners' Q1 2026 Austin industrial report adds the more punitive table-backed version of the same supply-risk read: 15.7% vacancy, 19.8% availability, 123K SF absorption, 13.18M SF under construction, and 82% of quarterly deliveries vacant. That keeps Austin industrial in a thesis-led allocation lane, not a broad recovery upgrade. See Source: Partners Austin Industrial Q1 2026 Quarterly Market Report.
• JLL's Q1 2026 Austin industrial report keeps the same high-beta allocation read: demand is visible in 554,611 SF of absorption, 48.5% preleasing, Baer Manufacturing, ZT Systems, and Samsung's 3.2M SF Taylor fab share of the pipeline, but 20.1% vacancy, 23.0% availability, 7.19M SF under development, 2.09M SF delivered, and rising concessions keep the market in a selective tenant-proof / basis lane. See Source: JLL Austin Industrial Market Dynamics Q1 2026.
• Marcus & Millichap's 2Q 2026 Austin teaser adds a later submarket-selection rule: Georgetown and Hays County are not simple buy-the-growth nodes. Georgetown had the most absorption relative to inventory but also the highest local vacancy after a large 2023 supply wave, while Hays County entered 2026 with vacancy roughly 600 bps higher than the prior quarter and a 2026 completion slate expected to nearly quadruple. Northeast Austin screens better on forward pipeline share than Southeast Austin, but the source is teaser-only. See Source: Marcus & Millichap Austin Industrial Market Report 2Q 2026.

Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q2 2026 adds a useful C&W cross-check to the CBRE Q2 stabilization signal: 22.3% vacancy, +792,442 SF Q2 absorption, +980,317 SF YTD absorption, 5.115M SF YTD leasing, 4.625M SF under construction, and $11.48/SF/year warehouse/distribution asking rent. The allocation conclusion remains selective rather than upgraded: C&W's vacancy is materially higher than CBRE's 19.4%, rents are easing, and the 4.6M-SF pipeline still requires submarket and product selection. Round Rock, Northeast, and Hays County show positive YTD absorption, while Georgetown and Southeast combine high vacancy with large supply or negative YTD absorption. The C&W embedded PDF metadata says Q12026, but the official page and visible report identify Q2 2026.

Colliers' claim-reviewed Q1 2026 national outlook adds one Austin pipeline callout: under-construction inventory equaled 10.2% of stock. Keep it source-defined and separate from the local broker tables; it supports supply-risk screening but does not establish Austin-wide vacancy, absorption, rent, or Planning Area performance. See Source: Colliers U.S. Industrial Market Outlook Report Q1 2026.

• Retail has enough scarcity to justify selective allocation while broader cycles reset.
• Partners' Q1 2026 Austin retail report sharpens that selection point: CBD and Cedar Park show rent / pipeline strength, Southwest showed the strongest absorption, while Georgetown, South, Central, Northeast, and East / Southeast posted negative absorption. Treat retail as corridor-selected income with prelease and trade-area gates, not a metro-wide rent-growth beta. See Source: Partners Austin Retail Q1 2026 Quarterly Market Report.
• Marcus & Millichap's 1Q 2026 Austin retail teaser supports the same corridor-selection rule with a different source-family lens: CBD retail is described as sub-3% vacancy with above-market rent, recent vacancies in supply-constrained submarkets leased within five months, and tenants are targeting I-35 / west-side space. Keep the supply caveat attached because Marcus also warns multi-tenant vacancy may climb back above single-tenant as new projects enter the market. See Source: Marcus & Millichap Austin Retail Market Report 1Q 2026.
• Austin Hospitality Market connects Source: Marcus & Millichap Austin Hospitality Market Report 1Q 2026 to matched forecast, stress and investor tests. Broker hotel / athletics comparisons and event visitation remain attributed; verified project / assessment stages do not establish current recovery, construction funding from tourism marketing, realized annual impact or property returns. Keep Austin's local hotel-cohort gap explicit.
• The supply cliff thesis matters here: the current pipeline is contracting, which improves the forward setup for well-located assets. Matthews' Q1 2026 public page supports the timing but not an upgrade: 14,600 units remained under construction, and vacancy / rent growth were still stressed despite absorption exceeding deliveries. See Source: Matthews Austin TX Multifamily Market Report Q1 2026.
• Northmarq's Q1 2026 Austin report makes that timing call more investable but still gated: 19,412 units remained under construction, 2026 completions were forecast near 10,200 units, and institutional buyers accounted for 74% of year-to-date transaction volume, yet effective rents were still down 6.9% year over year. See Source: Northmarq Austin Multifamily Market Insights Q1 2026.
• Marcus & Millichap's 2Q 2026 Austin multifamily teaser strengthens the demand side of that recovery lane without proving broad normalization. Marcus says Austin ranked first among major markets for population growth and household formation relative to size as of March 2026, net migration accounted for roughly 85% of 2025 population gains, average household income growth exceeded the national benchmark, and nonfarm / office-using employment both grew year over year. Treat this as higher-quality-asset demand support, not as permission to ignore vacancy, concessions, and pipeline exposure. See Source: Marcus & Millichap Austin Multifamily Market Report 2Q 2026.
• C&W's Q2 2026 Austin multifamily table adds the latest operating calibration: 323,368 units of inventory, 4,915 YTD deliveries, 10,483 YTD absorption, 15,415 units under construction, 9.8% stabilized vacancy, $1,423 average effective rent, and -4.1% annual effective-rent growth. Absorption running ahead of deliveries is constructive, but the vacancy, negative rent growth, and remaining pipeline keep Austin in a basis-and-carry recovery lane. Preserve C&W's provider-defined submarkets and stabilized-vacancy definition rather than blending them with civic geographies or other broker series. See Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026.

IPA's claim-reviewed 2026 National Multifamily Index places Austin at 17th of 34 markets, compared with Houston at 7th and Dallas-Fort Worth at 14th. This is an ordinal, one-year screening overlay that supports relative diligence prioritization but does not convert Austin's demand story into a market-wide upgrade or a neighborhood-level conclusion. See Source: IPA 2026 U.S. Multifamily Investment Forecast.

Marcus & Millichap's claim-reviewed 2026 National Office Market Index places Austin at 13th, versus Dallas-Fort Worth at 9th and Houston at 41st. The ordinal direction signal helps prioritize office diligence, but it does not replace Austin's vacancy, leasing, tenant-credit, WALT, debt, and basis checks or establish neighborhood performance. See Source: Marcus & Millichap 2026 U.S. Office Investment Forecast.

Marcus & Millichap's claim-reviewed 2026 National Retail Index places Austin at 12th, versus DFW at 17th and Houston at 26th. This is forward-looking ordinal screening context, not a retail operating table or neighborhood claim; retain trade-area, tenant-sales, rent, vacancy, and basis discipline. See Source: Marcus & Millichap 2026 U.S. Retail Investment Forecast.

Where Discipline Matters

• Do not buy the growth narrative at full-cycle pricing. Basis reset is the starting point, not the end point.
• Do not assume one office submarket can speak for the whole metro. Austin office is a collection of different markets, not a single market.
• Do not underwrite oversupplied industrial corridors as if they were scarce infill.
• Do not assume multifamily recovery is immediate just because the pipeline is shrinking. The market still needs time to absorb what was already delivered.
• Treat the former Rosedale School plan as a central-Austin entitlement and public-land-reuse signal, not as committed construction supply. Council approved the MF-6-CO rezoning on all three readings; the reported 435 units and $26 million sale remain secondary claims, and Austin ISD’s last captured update still had a deed-restriction court step outstanding before closing. See Former Rosedale School Site Multifamily Redevelopment.
• Do not convert Austin's high ADR / RevPAR relative ranking into hotel NOI growth without exact operating data, renovation costs, debt terms, and event-calendar proof.

Best-Fit Capital

Austin fits capital that can tolerate a slower and more uneven recovery in exchange for better long-duration demand fundamentals. The strongest buyers here are corridor specialists, patient multifamily recovery capital, and office investors who can underwrite a very narrow flight-to-quality lane. Broad opportunistic capital without local discipline is the wrong fit.

2026-05-05 Refresh Answer

• Best current lanes: Basis-reset multifamily and selective second-CBD/mixed-use exposure around the Domain/North Burnet and strongest urban nodes are the clearest Austin lanes after the tech-market correction.
• Strict-selection lane: Office, industrial, and retail are investable only with strict selection around tenant quality, pipeline exposure, and household-income support.
• Watch-list / avoid lane: Generic tech-office beta, elastic-edge multifamily, and undifferentiated development parcels remain watch-list or avoid lanes.
• Canonical KB pages that changed the answer: Austin Geography Hub, Austin, Austin Investment Hub, The Domain and North Burnet, Austin vs San Antonio, and Texas Underwriting in the 2026 Macro Regime.
• Source-backed current measurements: Q3/Q4 2025 and Q1 2026 DB-backed observations for Austin multifamily, office, industrial, and retail metrics are source-backed when period-labeled.
• Structured observations checked: 335 Austin observations across 51 direct market_geographies.market_name = 'Austin' geography rows and office, multifamily, industrial, and retail property types; all matched observations have public wiki_source_note provenance.

Recorded structured evidence

All figures sourced from the legacy structured snapshot market_observations. Sources: C&W/CoStar Q4 2025 (Industrial, Office, Retail); Partners RE Q4 2025 (Industrial cross-check); Berkadia Q3 2025 (Multifamily); MMG Q1 2026 (Multifamily pipeline).

Industrial — Austin Metro (Q4 2025)

Submarket vacancy range: Far Northwest 6.8% (tightest) to Georgetown 31.9% (highest stress). Best annual absorption: Hays County (+1.0M SF), Southeast (+778K SF), Georgetown (+506K SF).

Partners Q1 2026 cross-check: 15.7% vacancy, 19.8% availability, 122,998 SF Q1 absorption, 1,879,754 SF delivered, 13,183,230 SF under construction, $14.43/SF annual asking rent, and 82% of Q1 deliveries vacant. Capital-market rows show $190M of trailing sales volume, 98 transactions, and $143/SF pricing; the reported 78.9% cap rate appears to be a source typo and is not used.

Office — Austin Metro (Q4 2025)

Key submarket vacancy: Southwest 16.1% (best annual absorber at +452K SF), CBD 32.4% (+435K SF YTD), Far Northwest 31.5% (-13K SF YTD), Northeast 53.4% (most distressed). CBD Class A asking rent: $68.43/SF/yr.

Partners Q1 2026 cross-check: 23.3% vacancy, 24.3% availability, 1,080,265 SF Q1 absorption, 1,411,697 SF leasing activity, no deliveries, 191,850 SF under construction, $45.02/SF gross asking rent, $230M trailing sales volume, 68 office sales, $152/SF pricing, and a 6.5% average cap rate. The absorption row depends on the former 3M campus sale/removal and should not be treated as normal leasing recovery.

Multifamily — Austin Metro

Submarket vacancy range: West Austin 5.4% (tightest) to San Marcos 15.8% (highest). Downtown Austin +1.0% YoY rent growth is the only submarket showing positive rents as of Q4 2025.

Retail — Austin Metro (Q4 2025)

Gaps

Avison Young's Q1 2026 top-15 metro table adds a source-scoped all-property capital-markets baseline: Austin recorded $1.50B across 51 transactions, with volume down 16.6% and count down 29.2% year over year. This is transaction-market context, not asset-level pricing or an industrial-only series; keep cap-rate ranges and asset-class allocation dependent on local comps and broker-specific rows. See Source: Avison Young Q1 2026 U.S. Investment Sales Report.

These four Austin Avison Young observations are now claim-reviewed against the retained report extract. The review artifact preserves the top-15 metro and capital-markets boundary; it does not establish neighborhood transaction conditions or asset-level pricing.

• Office — capital markets data: Partners Q1 2026 now adds source-scoped Austin office capital-market rows for trailing sales volume, transaction count, pricing, and average cap rate. Still missing: asset-quality split, buyer/seller roster, debt terms, and repeat-sales or distress-price evidence by submarket.
• Industrial — capital markets data: The structured layer now has an all-property Avison Young metro transaction baseline, but no Austin industrial-only investment-sales volume or cap-rate series. Allocation decisions still require qualitative corridor reads plus local comps.
• Multifamily — Q4 2025 Berkadia update: The Berkadia observations are as of Q3 2025. No Q4 2025 Berkadia refresh has been imported yet. The MMG Q1 2026 pipeline report covers supply only, not occupancy or rent.
• Retail — tenant-sales and center-level detail: Partners Q1 2026 now adds metro and submarket vacancy, availability, absorption, leasing, construction, delivery, rent, and capital-market rows. Austin retail still lacks tenant sales, rollover, center-level occupancy, and corridor-specific cap-rate evidence.
• Office — submarket rent granularity: Submarket asking rents for most Austin office corridors are not yet in the DB; only metro, CBD, and select submarket data is populated.
• No life sciences or flex/R&D data: Austin is not yet tracked as a life sciences cluster in the DB. Any future TMC-adjacent or semiconductor corridor observations would need new geography entries.

Related Pages

• Analyses Hub
• Geographies Hub
• Austin
• Austin Office Cluster Comparison
• Austin Urban Core Cluster Comparison
• Austin High-Value Multifamily Playbook
• Austin Hospitality Market
• Austin Suburban Cluster Comparison
• Texas Multifamily Cross-Metro Comparison
• Office Bifurcation
• Texas Underwriting in the 2026 Macro Regime
• Williamson County Semiconductor Corridor
• Downtown Austin and Rainey Street

Official Zilker Point Address Check

The leasing page confirms the reported building name at the TCAD address. It supports identity matching while leaving legal-interest, appraisal and transaction concepts distinct. Source: Zilker Point Contact October 2026.

Zilker Point: Commitment Before Move-In

SolarWinds’ reported 100,000-SF commitment precedes a fall-2027 move. A landlord can secure future rent while carrying fit-out and delay exposure; model those obligations and concessions before treating the announcement as stabilized income. The first-party address supports the TCAD identity cross-check, while tax appraisal value and the article’s ownership brand remain separate from transaction price and legal title. Source: Connect SolarWinds Zilker Point Headquarters Lease 2026.

Conditional submarket rankings — October 24, 2026

Question and investor mandate. Which selected Austin provider districts deserve diligence for an existing asset held for current income over five to seven years? Assume 50%–60% leverage, subject to verified cash coverage, and comparable unlevered entry yields after recurring capital, leasing and repair reserves. These are CRET scenario assumptions. The investor can negotiate price, verify leases, perform ordinary repairs and fund leasing work. No acquisition price, lender quote, cap rate or return forecast is established here.

Geography and evidence. The research target is Austin–Round Rock–San Marcos, CBSA 12420: Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis and Williamson counties. Burnet, Bell and Blanco are outside. Source: Census Vintage 2025 MSAs 21–30 Population and County Roster keeps the strict county roster. Provider districts and totals remain distinct from this official MSA. Outer regions whose containment is unresolved stay unranked; reported core districts are a selected comparison, with no parcel or municipal equivalence claimed. The retail map legend cannot support a numerical crosswalk. All useful operating cells are preserved for their actual survey scope, including unranked regions.

Facts, interpretation and scenarios. Source facts below retain provider, period, vacancy definition, rent basis and measurement window. Rankings express conditional capital-allocation judgment. Postures separate selective current income, tactical basis/lease-up and specialist execution. Within each group, occupied-income support, vacancy, current and YTD absorption, construction and explicit adjacent comparisons determine the order; table order alone does not. A lower vacancy rate does not establish a higher expected return.

The base case uses current collected cash income, current concessions and verified costs, with flat rent and no exit-cap compression. Stress net cash income down 10%, borrowing cost up 150 basis points, exit cap rate up 100 basis points and downtime extended twelve months. Fail the asset if leases and reserves cannot cover debt, repairs and leasing without rescue equity or assumed refinancing. A verified stronger cash yield, better tenant durability or lower required capital can reverse every adjacent preference. Reconsider the call after two comparable quarters contradict its occupancy direction, a committed competing project changes supply or a major tenant leaves. These scenarios are not publisher forecasts.

The four comparisons completed independent field review. Calls have provisional evidence and conviction 2, or 1 for specialist-only cases. No consensus disagreement, historical rank movement or new national rank is asserted. The complete native imports have reviewed receipts and await the committed-main single writer; no public structured key metric is inferred from pending packages. Independent field review is complete; the separate product publication gate remains.

Multifamily submarket allocation

Evidence as of 2026-06-30. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Eight selected core rows from22 provider locals are ranked. Bastrop County, Buda-Kyle, East Austin, Far North Austin, Georgetown-Leander, Lake Travis, Midtown Austin, North Austin, Northeast Austin, Northwest Austin, Pflugerville, San Marcos, Southeast Austin and West Austin remain unranked. These omissions are coverage or mandate limits, not avoid calls. Georgetown-Leander, Lake Travis and San Marcos have unresolved outer-boundary scope. No civic polygon equivalence is asserted for any row.

The retained two-page Q 2 report is the latest detailed C&W local grid found on the publisher landing page at the October 24 review; no newer local cells are inferred. Its 22 named rows are provider geographies, not civic polygons. Georgetown-Leander, Lake Travis and San Marcos need outer-boundary verification before strict-MSA ranking; they remain unranked. The source total is not asserted to cover exactly the current five-county MSA. Rent per unit is monthly effective as specified by the page 1 chart legend; the separate per-SF table column has no explicit interval and remains literal. Deliveries, inventory growth and absorption are YTD, not current-quarter flows. The prior 230-cell package had no matching source in the read-only native store. This new guarded package admits the same printed complete table with explicit YTD periods and faithful raw tokens; it does not mutate a shared legacy period definition.

1. Central Austin — selective. Q2 2026 facts: stabilized vacancy 7.3%; YTD net absorption -3 units; under construction 0 units; monthly effective rent $1,851/unit; annual effective-rent change -0.1%. Investment interpretation: Central leads Downtown on lower stabilized vacancy and no active construction, although the survey is small and YTD absorption is negative. This explicitly prefers Central Austin to Downtown Austin at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify current collected rent, concessions, bad debt, taxes, insurance, repairs and a fully funded supply reserve. Counterevidence: The 1,876-unit survey lost 3 occupied units YTD; low vacancy does not establish a liquid acquisition market. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Presentation call: Select Central Austin when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: No active construction reported for this provider row; 7.3% stabilized vacancy below the provider's 9.8% survey total. Risks: Small 1,876-unit survey lost 3 occupied units YTD; verify collections and repairs; 7.3% vacancy; fund concessions and repairs.

2. Downtown Austin — selective. Q2 2026 facts: stabilized vacancy 7.6%; YTD net absorption 526 units; under construction 775 units; monthly effective rent $3,578/unit; annual effective-rent change 0.1%. Investment interpretation: Downtown leads Round Rock on positive annual effective-rent growth and lower stabilized vacancy, subject to funding its larger construction exposure. This explicitly prefers Downtown Austin to Round Rock at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify current collected rent, concessions, bad debt, taxes, insurance, repairs and a fully funded supply reserve. Counterevidence: The 775-unit pipeline and premium monthly rent require a concession and operating-cost test. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Presentation call: Select Downtown Austin when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: YTD net absorption: +526 units; Annual effective-rent growth: 0.1%. Risks: 775 units under construction; fund competition and concession reserves; 7.6% vacancy; fund concessions and repairs.

3. Round Rock — selective. Q2 2026 facts: stabilized vacancy 8.7%; YTD net absorption 506 units; under construction 0 units; monthly effective rent $1,346/unit; annual effective-rent change -2.3%. Investment interpretation: Round Rock leads South Central on zero construction and a smaller annual effective-rent decline, despite higher vacancy. This explicitly prefers Round Rock to South Central Austin at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify current collected rent, concessions, bad debt, taxes, insurance, repairs and a fully funded supply reserve. Counterevidence: Stabilized vacancy remains 8.7%, so a zero pipeline is not full occupancy. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Presentation call: Select Round Rock when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: YTD net absorption: +506 units; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Annual effective-rent change -2.3%; fund concessions and repairs; 8.7% vacancy; fund concessions and repairs.

4. South Central Austin — selective. Q2 2026 facts: stabilized vacancy 8.0%; YTD net absorption 293 units; under construction 572 units; monthly effective rent $1,716/unit; annual effective-rent change -2.7%. Investment interpretation: South Central leads Southwest on a smaller annual effective-rent decline and fewer units under construction, despite higher vacancy. This explicitly prefers South Central Austin to Southwest Austin at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify current collected rent, concessions, bad debt, taxes, insurance, repairs and a fully funded supply reserve. Counterevidence: The 572-unit pipeline and 2.7% annual rent decline limit current-income confidence. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Presentation call: Select South Central Austin when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: YTD net absorption: +293 units; 8.0% stabilized vacancy below the provider's 9.8% survey total. Risks: Annual effective-rent change -2.7%; fund concessions and repairs; 8.0% vacancy; fund concessions and repairs.

5. Southwest Austin — tactical. Q2 2026 facts: stabilized vacancy 6.5%; YTD net absorption 387 units; under construction 1,072 units; monthly effective rent $1,629/unit; annual effective-rent change -4.5%. Investment interpretation: Southwest leads South Austin on lower stabilized vacancy and no YTD deliveries, while its larger pipeline requires a funded discount. This explicitly prefers Southwest Austin to South Austin at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify current collected rent, concessions, bad debt, taxes, insurance, repairs and a fully funded supply reserve. Counterevidence: Effective rent fell 4.5% annually and 1,072 units remain under construction. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Southwest Austin when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: YTD net absorption: +387 units; 6.5% stabilized vacancy below the provider's 9.8% survey total. Risks: Annual effective-rent change -4.5%; fund concessions and repairs; 6.5% vacancy; fund concessions and repairs.

6. South Austin — tactical. Q2 2026 facts: stabilized vacancy 8.5%; YTD net absorption 553 units; under construction 883 units; monthly effective rent $1,317/unit; annual effective-rent change -3.3%. Investment interpretation: South Austin leads Cedar Park on a smaller annual effective-rent decline, accepting slightly higher stabilized vacancy. This explicitly prefers South Austin to Cedar Park at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify current collected rent, concessions, bad debt, taxes, insurance, repairs and a fully funded supply reserve. Counterevidence: Vacancy is 8.5% and 883 units remain under construction. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Presentation call: Tactical South Austin when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: YTD net absorption: +553 units; 8.5% stabilized vacancy below the provider's 9.8% survey total. Risks: Annual effective-rent change -3.3%; fund concessions and repairs; 8.5% vacancy; fund concessions and repairs.

7. Cedar Park — tactical. Q2 2026 facts: stabilized vacancy 7.4%; YTD net absorption 585 units; under construction 0 units; monthly effective rent $1,278/unit; annual effective-rent change -6.0%. Investment interpretation: Cedar Park leads Riverside on lower stabilized vacancy and zero active construction, despite a sharper annual rent decline. This explicitly prefers Cedar Park to Riverside at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify current collected rent, concessions, bad debt, taxes, insurance, repairs and a fully funded supply reserve. Counterevidence: The 6.0% annual effective-rent decline challenges any immediate rent-recovery underwriting. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Cedar Park when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: YTD net absorption: +585 units; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Annual effective-rent change -6.0%; fund concessions and repairs; 7.4% vacancy; fund concessions and repairs.

8. Riverside — tactical. Q2 2026 facts: stabilized vacancy 9.1%; YTD net absorption 477 units; under construction 0 units; monthly effective rent $1,271/unit; annual effective-rent change -5.4%. Investment interpretation: Riverside is last in this selected comparison because higher vacancy and a 5.4% annual rent decline outweigh zero construction. This is the last candidate in this selected comparison; no order outside it is inferred. Price and work gate: Verify current collected rent, concessions, bad debt, taxes, insurance, repairs and a fully funded supply reserve. Counterevidence: Positive YTD absorption does not remove concessions, collections and repair risk. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Riverside when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: YTD net absorption: +477 units; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Annual effective-rent change -5.4%; fund concessions and repairs; 9.1% vacancy; fund concessions and repairs.

Board call: Prefer Central Austin for current income at a verified price with funded capital.

Industrial submarket allocation

Evidence as of 2026-09-30. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Nine selected core rows from13 districts are ranked. Far Northeast remains unranked as a limited current-income comparison; Far Northwest, Georgetown and provider Hays County remain unranked because exact outer containment is unresolved. The page3 survey map is broader than a parcel-accurate MSA crosswalk. The two product panels overlap the total and are not extra locations.

The 13 provider districts and two overlapping product cohorts do not establish complete five-county MSA coverage. The page 3 provider polygon extends toward county edges around Georgetown, Far Northwest and Hays County; precise containment is unresolved for those three rows, so they remain unranked and unbound to the CBSA. All operating cells remain available with their literal provider identity. Core rows are a selected Austin-area screen. The survey total and product cohorts are not a Census MSA statistic. Annual weighted net asking rent is explicit in the page 2 footnote. Overall net asking 11.96 on page 1 differs in product basis from the 15.09 flex and 11.57 warehouse quotes. Rounded narrative absorption is not substituted for exact grid values.

1. East — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 12.8%; Q3 net absorption 92,578 SF; under construction 681,259 SF; YTD net absorption 169,561 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $12.28/SF/year. Investment interpretation: East leads Central because both have 12.8% vacancy but East has positive quarter and YTD absorption; its 681,259 SF pipeline is the offset. This explicitly prefers East to Central at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: New construction can compete directly with existing leases; annual asking rent is not collected income. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select East when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +92,578 SF; 12.8% vacancy below the provider's 21.8% survey total. Risks: 681,259 SF under construction; fund competing supply and building work; 12.8% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

2. Central — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 12.8%; Q3 net absorption -14,420 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption -14,420 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $15.22/SF/year. Investment interpretation: Central leads North on lower vacancy and no construction, accepting a smaller survey and negative quarter/YTD absorption. This explicitly prefers Central to North at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: The 1.02 MSF survey lost 14,420 occupied SF in both Q 3 and YTD. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select Central when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: No active construction reported for this provider row; 12.8% vacancy below the provider's 21.8% survey total. Risks: Q3 net absorption -14,420 SF; verify tenant credit and funded backfill; 12.8% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

3. North — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 16.4%; Q3 net absorption 221,461 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption 68,533 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $11.92/SF/year. Investment interpretation: North leads Cedar Park on lower vacancy and zero construction, while its positive quarter exceeds Cedar Park in absolute occupied-space gain. This explicitly prefers North to Cedar Park at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: YTD absorption is only 68,533 SF against a 13.08 MSF inventory. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select North when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +221,461 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Verify rollover, tenant credit, power, loading and required building work; 16.4% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

4. Cedar Park — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 20.0%; Q3 net absorption 158,658 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption 396,733 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $12.10/SF/year. Investment interpretation: Cedar Park leads Northwest on positive quarter/YTD absorption, despite slightly higher vacancy. This explicitly prefers Cedar Park to Northwest at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: The 393,675 SF of YTD deliveries and 20.0% vacancy still require funded lease-up reserves. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select Cedar Park when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +158,658 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Verify rollover, tenant credit, power, loading and required building work; 20.0% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

5. Northwest — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 18.1%; Q3 net absorption -32,400 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption -125,574 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $10.95/SF/year. Investment interpretation: Northwest leads Northeast on lower vacancy and zero construction, despite its negative quarter/YTD absorption. This explicitly prefers Northwest to Northeast at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: YTD occupancy fell 125,574 SF; no pipeline does not prove healthy demand. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Northwest when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: No active construction reported for this provider row; 18.1% vacancy below the provider's 21.8% survey total. Risks: Q3 net absorption -32,400 SF; verify tenant credit and funded backfill; 18.1% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

6. Northeast — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 23.0%; Q3 net absorption 130,655 SF; under construction 283,390 SF; YTD net absorption 443,232 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $12.19/SF/year. Investment interpretation: Northeast leads Round Rock on lower vacancy and stronger positive quarter/YTD absorption. This explicitly prefers Northeast to Round Rock at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: Vacancy remains 23.0% with 283,390 SF under construction. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Northeast when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +130,655 SF; YTD net absorption: +443,232 SF. Risks: 283,390 SF under construction; fund competing supply and building work; 23.0% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

7. Round Rock — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 24.9%; Q3 net absorption 5,107 SF; under construction 450,645 SF; YTD net absorption 405,032 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $14.15/SF/year. Investment interpretation: Round Rock leads Southeast on a smaller pipeline and stronger YTD absorption, accepting 0.2 percentage points higher vacancy. This explicitly prefers Round Rock to Southeast at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: Only 5,107 SF of quarter absorption followed 352,480 SF of YTD completions. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Round Rock when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +5,107 SF; YTD net absorption: +405,032 SF. Risks: 450,645 SF under construction; fund competing supply and building work; 24.9% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

8. Southeast — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 24.7%; Q3 net absorption 98,676 SF; under construction 1,325,521 SF; YTD net absorption 18,024 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $10.78/SF/year. Investment interpretation: Southeast leads South on lower vacancy and positive quarter/YTD absorption, while its much larger pipeline increases reserve needs. This explicitly prefers Southeast to South at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: The 1,325,521 SF pipeline follows 1,215,171 SF of YTD completions; large leases do not prove broad rent power. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Southeast when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +98,676 SF; YTD net absorption: +18,024 SF. Risks: 1,325,521 SF under construction; fund competing supply and building work; 24.7% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

9. South — specialist. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 35.0%; Q3 net absorption 0 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption -872 SF; warehouse weighted net asking $13.39/SF/year. Investment interpretation: South is last in this selected comparison because 35.0% vacancy and zero Q 3 absorption leave a substantial leasing burden. This is the last candidate in this selected comparison; no order outside it is inferred. Price and work gate: Verify achieved net income, tenant credit, rollover, loading, power, functional space and all building work. Counterevidence: YTD absorption is negative 872 SF after 303,112 SF of YTD deliveries. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Specialist South when current income supports price and capital. Fewer than two favorable source observations are established; no bull case is asserted. Risks: Q3 net absorption 0 SF; verify tenant credit and funded backfill; 35.0% vacancy; fund rollover and building work.

Board call: Prefer East for current income at a verified price with funded capital.

Office submarket allocation

Evidence as of 2026-09-30. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Eight selected core rows from11 provider districts are ranked. Far Northwest remains unranked because outer boundaries lack an office map; Northeast and Southeast remain outside this selected mandate comparison. No industrial polygon is transferred to an office label. Core Austin districts are compared as provider areas, not complete civic or MSA polygons.

The 11 provider districts are source-defined and are not matched parcel polygons or civic neighborhoods. Outer Far Northwest containment is unresolved and that row stays unranked. This two-page report has no office map; do not transfer industrial district polygons to office. Provider totals and all geography records remain without an asserted Census CBSA equivalence. Full-service asking rents have no stated payment interval and remain literal dollars/SF. The page 2 operating table reports 177,193 SF under construction, while the named 5 th&Walsh project table prints 198,000 SF. Both are kept as a source conflict; the operating total governs this grid. Page 1 calls 3.2 MSF sublease availability, but page 2 specifically labels 3,193,318 SF SUBLET VACANT. Availability is not substituted for vacant space. Round Rock sublet vacant is 93,342 SF in the text and visible table, not 93,344.

1. Central — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 11.2%; Q3 net absorption -27,361 SF; under construction 177,193 SF; YTD net absorption -12,680 SF; full-service asking $51.74/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: Central leads Northwest on lower vacancy and a smaller YTD occupancy loss; the construction conflict and new supply require a funded reserve. This explicitly prefers Central to Northwest at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Use existing leases to fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime, repairs and debt service. Counterevidence: Operating construction 177,193 SF conflicts with the 198,000 SF project table and Q 3 absorption is negative 27,361 SF. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select Central when current income supports price and capital. Fewer than two favorable source observations are established; no bull case is asserted. Risks: Q3 net absorption -27,361 SF; fund tenant improvements and downtime; 11.2% vacancy; fund tenant improvements, commissions and downtime.

2. Northwest — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 16.7%; Q3 net absorption -24,959 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption -27,560 SF; full-service asking $35.91/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: Northwest leads Southwest on a smaller YTD occupancy loss and zero construction, despite 0.1 percentage points higher vacancy. This explicitly prefers Northwest to Southwest at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Use existing leases to fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime, repairs and debt service. Counterevidence: Q 3 absorption is negative 24,959 SF; apparent low vacancy can coexist with tenant downsizing. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select Northwest when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: No active construction reported for this provider row; 16.7% vacancy below the provider's 27.1% survey total. Risks: Q3 net absorption -24,959 SF; fund tenant improvements and downtime; 16.7% vacancy; fund tenant improvements, commissions and downtime.

3. Southwest — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 16.6%; Q3 net absorption 47,306 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption -76,828 SF; full-service asking $44.24/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: Southwest leads North Central on lower vacancy and positive Q 3 absorption, accepting a negative YTD result. This explicitly prefers Southwest to North Central at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Use existing leases to fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime, repairs and debt service. Counterevidence: YTD occupancy fell 76,828 SF; one positive quarter does not establish a recovery. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select Southwest when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +47,306 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: YTD net absorption -76,828 SF; test lease durability; 16.6% vacancy; fund tenant improvements, commissions and downtime.

4. North Central — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 20.9%; Q3 net absorption 8,258 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption 17,961 SF; full-service asking $30.57/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: North Central leads Round Rock on lower vacancy, positive quarter/YTD absorption and zero construction. This explicitly prefers North Central to Round Rock at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Use existing leases to fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime, repairs and debt service. Counterevidence: The 20.9% vacancy still requires tenant-improvement, commission and downtime reserves. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select North Central when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +8,258 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Current leases must fund tenant improvements, commissions and extended downtime; 20.9% vacancy; fund tenant improvements, commissions and downtime.

5. Round Rock — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 24.1%; Q3 net absorption -24,619 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption -32,923 SF; full-service asking $37.76/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: Round Rock leads South Central on lower vacancy, accepting negative quarter/YTD absorption. This explicitly prefers Round Rock to South Central at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Use existing leases to fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime, repairs and debt service. Counterevidence: The 24.1% vacancy and 3,963 SF YTD reported leasing indicate a difficult backfill screen. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Round Rock when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: No active construction reported for this provider row; 24.1% vacancy below the provider's 27.1% survey total. Risks: Q3 net absorption -24,619 SF; fund tenant improvements and downtime; 24.1% vacancy; fund tenant improvements, commissions and downtime.

6. South Central — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 25.3%; Q3 net absorption 68,679 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption 10,327 SF; full-service asking $52.15/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: South Central leads CBD on lower vacancy and positive quarter/YTD absorption, with zero construction. This explicitly prefers South Central to CBD at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Use existing leases to fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime, repairs and debt service. Counterevidence: Vacancy is 25.3%; positive absorption alone does not fund lease costs. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical South Central when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +68,679 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Current leases must fund tenant improvements, commissions and extended downtime; 25.3% vacancy; fund tenant improvements, commissions and downtime.

7. CBD — specialist. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 33.3%; Q3 net absorption 104,948 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption 127,622 SF; full-service asking $66.73/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: CBD leads East on lower vacancy and positive YTD absorption, but the 33.3% vacancy requires specialist leasing execution. This explicitly prefers CBD to East at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Use existing leases to fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime, repairs and debt service. Counterevidence: Waterline delivery and premium full-service quotes do not establish property cash flow. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Specialist CBD when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +104,948 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Current leases must fund tenant improvements, commissions and extended downtime; 33.3% vacancy; fund tenant improvements, commissions and downtime.

8. East — specialist. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 44.4%; Q3 net absorption 49,227 SF; under construction 0 SF; YTD net absorption -24,206 SF; full-service asking $59.17/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: East is last in this selected comparison because 44.4% vacancy and negative YTD absorption outweigh its positive quarter. This is the last candidate in this selected comparison; no order outside it is inferred. Price and work gate: Use existing leases to fund tenant improvements, commissions, downtime, repairs and debt service. Counterevidence: Office rent intervals remain unstated; no annualized quote or broad recovery is assumed. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

Presentation call: Specialist East when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +49,227 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: YTD net absorption -24,206 SF; test lease durability; 44.4% vacancy; fund tenant improvements, commissions and downtime.

Board call: Prefer Central for current income at a verified price with funded capital.

Retail submarket allocation

Evidence as of 2026-09-30. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Eight selected core rows from18 provider locals are ranked. Bastrop County, Caldwell County, Cedar Park, Central, Far Northeast, Far Northwest, Georgetown, Hays County, North and Northwest remain unranked. Boundary-uncertain outer rows and the map legend defect remain explicit. The table is not split into the19 numbered map zones.

The 18 local operating rows plus total are preserved. Page 6 map legend is visibly mismatched: northern number 10 is labeled Hays County, while the southern map number 11 is labeled Northeast; numbered colors cannot establish a reliable district crosswalk. Page 5 names govern the operating cells. Bastrop is one county aggregate in the table despite two differently named map zones. Far Northwest, Far Northeast and Georgetown boundaries remain unverified and unranked; table-only Hays County is retained as a provider row without geographic equivalence. Caldwell vacancy 4.7% exceeds availability 4.6%; this source anomaly is retained, not corrected. Q 2 availability 4.9% is explicitly a revision from the previously reported 5.1%. Rent is NNN dollars/SF with no stated payment interval. Report-folder 2026/07 is not a publication date; the landing page is dated October 19.

1. South — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 2.7%; Q3 net absorption 38,160 SF; under construction 0 SF; availability 3.2%; reported NNN asking $26.14/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: South leads Southwest because its lower available-space share, zero pipeline and zero quarterly completions reduce new-space competition, despite slightly higher vacancy. This explicitly prefers South to Southwest at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify tenant sales, anchor credit, co-tenancy, lease rollover, roof work and all backfill capital. Counterevidence: Q 3 occupied-space gain is 38,160 SF; tenant sales and anchor credit remain unobserved. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select South when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +38,160 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Tenant sales and anchor credit are unobserved; verify collections and backfill capital; 2.7% vacancy; fund anchor backfill, roof work and leasing reserves.

2. Southwest — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 2.5%; Q3 net absorption 100,916 SF; under construction 67,671 SF; availability 3.7%; reported NNN asking $25.11/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: Southwest leads CBD on stronger current absorption and a broader existing survey, despite somewhat higher vacancy. This explicitly prefers Southwest to CBD at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify tenant sales, anchor credit, co-tenancy, lease rollover, roof work and all backfill capital. Counterevidence: Quarterly completions 114,972 SF exceeded absorption 100,916 SF;67,671 SF remains underway. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select Southwest when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +100,916 SF; 2.5% vacancy below the provider's 3.7% survey total. Risks: Tenant sales and anchor credit are unobserved; verify collections and backfill capital; 2.5% vacancy; fund anchor backfill, roof work and leasing reserves.

3. CBD — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 1.9%; Q3 net absorption 0 SF; under construction 0 SF; availability 3.4%; reported NNN asking $24.75/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: CBD leads Southeast on zero quarterly occupancy loss versus an 848 SF loss, accepting higher vacancy and availability. This explicitly prefers CBD to Southeast at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify tenant sales, anchor credit, co-tenancy, lease rollover, roof work and all backfill capital. Counterevidence: Zero absorption and zero reported leasing activity do not establish growth or tenant durability. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select CBD when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: No active construction reported for this provider row; 1.9% vacancy below the provider's 3.7% survey total. Risks: Zero reported quarter leasing and absorption; verify tenant cash and lease rollover; 1.9% vacancy; fund anchor backfill, roof work and leasing reserves.

4. Southeast — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 1.6%; Q3 net absorption -848 SF; under construction 0 SF; availability 1.9%; reported NNN asking $25.66/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: Southeast leads West Central on lower vacancy and availability with no construction, accepting a small quarterly occupancy loss. This explicitly prefers Southeast to West Central at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify tenant sales, anchor credit, co-tenancy, lease rollover, roof work and all backfill capital. Counterevidence: The 848 SF occupancy loss and 3,600 SF of leasing describe a small current-demand signal. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select Southeast when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: No active construction reported for this provider row; 1.6% vacancy below the provider's 3.7% survey total. Risks: Q3 net absorption -848 SF; fund anchor backfill and leasing costs; 1.6% vacancy; fund anchor backfill, roof work and leasing reserves.

5. West Central — selective. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 3.0%; Q3 net absorption 1,787 SF; under construction 0 SF; availability 5.1%; reported NNN asking $29.28/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: West Central leads Round Rock on lower vacancy, positive absorption and zero pipeline, while its small survey limits repeatability. This explicitly prefers West Central to Round Rock at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify tenant sales, anchor credit, co-tenancy, lease rollover, roof work and all backfill capital. Counterevidence: Only 1.04 MSF is surveyed; a 1,787 SF occupancy gain is not a broad retail recovery. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Presentation call: Select West Central when current income supports price and capital. Favorable observations: Q3 net absorption: +1,787 SF; No active construction reported for this provider row. Risks: Tenant sales and anchor credit are unobserved; verify collections and backfill capital; 3.0% vacancy; fund anchor backfill, roof work and leasing reserves.

6. Round Rock — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 3.8%; Q3 net absorption -15,004 SF; under construction 68,300 SF; availability 4.4%; reported NNN asking $25.86/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: Round Rock leads East on lower vacancy and availability, despite its larger absolute quarter occupancy loss. This explicitly prefers Round Rock to East at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify tenant sales, anchor credit, co-tenancy, lease rollover, roof work and all backfill capital. Counterevidence: Q 3 absorption is negative 15,004 SF and 68,300 SF remains under construction. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Round Rock when current income supports price and capital. Fewer than two favorable source observations are established; no bull case is asserted. Risks: Q3 net absorption -15,004 SF; fund anchor backfill and leasing costs; 3.8% vacancy; fund anchor backfill, roof work and leasing reserves.

7. East — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 4.2%; Q3 net absorption -13,380 SF; under construction 34,436 SF; availability 5.2%; reported NNN asking $33.92/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: East leads Northeast on much lower vacancy and availability, despite negative quarter absorption. This explicitly prefers East to Northeast at comparable verified reserve-adjusted cash yields. Price and work gate: Verify tenant sales, anchor credit, co-tenancy, lease rollover, roof work and all backfill capital. Counterevidence: The highest reported asking quote in the source does not establish the cheapest acquisition basis. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical East when current income supports price and capital. Fewer than two favorable source observations are established; no bull case is asserted. Risks: Q3 net absorption -13,380 SF; fund anchor backfill and leasing costs; 4.2% vacancy; fund anchor backfill, roof work and leasing reserves.

8. Northeast — tactical. Q3 2026 facts: vacancy 9.9%; Q3 net absorption 118,394 SF; under construction 104,358 SF; availability 11.3%; reported NNN asking $21.59/SF, interval unstated. Investment interpretation: Northeast is last in this selected comparison because 9.9% vacancy and 11.3% availability require the largest backfill reserve. This is the last candidate in this selected comparison; no order outside it is inferred. Price and work gate: Verify tenant sales, anchor credit, co-tenancy, lease rollover, roof work and all backfill capital. Counterevidence: Positive 118,394 SF absorption follows 51,600 SF of quarterly deliveries and 104,358 SF underway. Reversal: A verified stronger reserve-adjusted cash yield or smaller capital burden at the adjacent alternative reverses this preference after the common stress. Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

Presentation call: Tactical Northeast when current income supports price and capital. Fewer than two favorable source observations are established; no bull case is asserted. Risks: Tenant sales and anchor credit are unobserved; verify collections and backfill capital; 9.9% vacancy; fund anchor backfill, roof work and leasing reserves.

Board call: Prefer South for current income at a verified price with funded capital.

Sources

• Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q3 2026

• Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q3 2026

• Source: Partners Austin Retail Quarterly Market Report Q3 2026

• Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

• Source: Census Vintage 2025 MSAs 21–30 Population and County Roster

• Source: Federal Reserve FOMC Statement September 16 2026

• Source: U.S. Treasury Daily Par Yield Curve September 2026

• Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q2 2026

• Cushman & Wakefield Austin Office MarketBeat Q2 2026

• Legacy Texas Market Thesis

• CW Austin Office MarketBeat Q4 2025

• Source: Partners Austin Office Q1 2026 Quarterly Market Report

• Source: JLL Austin Office Market Dynamics Q2 2026

• Austin Medical Office Market

• Source: Matthews Austin TX Medical Office Market Report Q2 2026

• Austin Industrial Market Intelligence 2025

• Source: Dalfen Markets Airport Logistics Center After Four Hands Expansion

• Austin Retail Market Intelligence 2025

• Berkadia Austin Multifamily Market Report Q3 2025

• MMG Austin Q1 2026 Pipeline Report

• Source: Matthews Austin TX Multifamily Market Report Q1 2026

• Source: Northmarq Austin Multifamily Market Insights Q1 2026

• Source: Cushman & Wakefield Austin Multifamily MarketBeat Q2 2026

• Source: Matthews Austin TX Industrial Market Report Q1 2026

• Source: Partners Austin Industrial Q1 2026 Quarterly Market Report

• Source: JLL Austin Industrial Market Dynamics Q1 2026

• Source: CBRE Austin Industrial Figures Q2 2026

• Cushman & Wakefield Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q2 2026

• Source: Marcus & Millichap Austin Retail Market Report 1Q 2026

• Source: Partners Austin Retail Q1 2026 Quarterly Market Report

• Source: Marcus & Millichap Austin Hospitality Market Report 1Q 2026

• Source: Avison Young Q1 2026 U.S. Investment Sales Report

• Source: IPA 2026 U.S. Multifamily Investment Forecast

• Source: Colliers U.S. Industrial Market Outlook Report Q1 2026

• Source: OHT Partners Rosedale School Apartments Austin 2026

• Source: Marcus & Millichap 2026 U.S. Office Investment Forecast

• Source: Marcus & Millichap 2026 U.S. Retail Investment Forecast

Review and navigation

Independent claim review checked each field against its own prose and primary sources. Compatible existing national entries link office, retail. The multifamily, industrial comparisons remain reviewed drafts because no compatible national market or strategy is present. The local investor mandate governs its comparisons. A narrow parent does not extend its posture to every local candidate. Published schema status establishes release eligibility only; no shared publication is created by this research batch. See MSAs 21–30 Submarket Rankings for cohort coverage, dates and limitations.

The national office entry concerns CBD/Domain trophy selection. CBD remains specialist in the local all-class comparison; Domain/Far Northwest remains unranked. The child supplies no trophy-cohort or Domain execution proof and does not clear the national premium-node gate. The retail parent keeps its corridor-specialty posture: broader current-income calls include CBD/Southwest but do not resolve Domain/North Burnet or the omitted Cedar Park comparison. The report does not establish grocery-anchored or every shopping-center format performance.