A paired analysis produces a negative adjustment for an added feature. The appraiser should:
Correct Answer
A) Investigate — the market may genuinely discount it
Why this is correct: Paired sales analysis reveals what the market paid for a feature. If the analysis shows a negative adjustment (the property with the feature sold for less), it means the market may discount that feature. The appraiser must investigate to understand why, not ignore the data. Why the other choices are wrong: Reversing the sign manipulates the data. Setting it to zero ignores the evidence. Discarding the analysis avoids the finding. Exam tip: Trust your market data. If a feature has negative contributory value, report and explain it.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
Investigating is right because a negative result is a genuine possible market finding and also a classic symptom of confounded pairs. The investigation asks whether the pairs were clean, whether the feature is a superadequacy for this market, and whether other evidence such as listing history or agent interviews corroborates a discount. If the discount is real, the appraiser reports it and explains why, which is a defensible and sometimes necessary conclusion. If the pairs were contaminated, the investigation reveals that instead, and either outcome improves the analysis.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option B: Reverse the sign to make the result sensible
Reversing a sign to make a result look sensible is data manipulation, and it substitutes the appraiser's expectation for the market's behavior. It also destroys the audit trail, since the workfile would show a conclusion contradicting the analysis behind it. This is the response most likely to draw a disciplinary finding if a reviewer reconstructs the derivation.
Option C: Set the adjustment to zero automatically
Zeroing the adjustment discards a finding without explaining it and quietly asserts that the feature has no effect, which the data contradicts. It is less obviously wrong than flipping the sign, which makes it more tempting, but it is the same failure to engage with evidence. If the pairs were flawed, zero is no more supported than the negative figure.
Option D: Discard paired analysis for that feature entirely
Abandoning paired analysis for the feature removes the appraiser's best tool precisely when it has produced an interesting result. The technique is not disproved by an unexpected output; it may in fact be working correctly. Discarding it also leaves the appraiser needing some other support for the adjustment, which the option does not supply.
The Market Votes, You Report
Paired analysis is a vote count, not an opinion poll of the appraiser. If the market voted down a feature, the job is to verify the count and report it, not to overturn the election because the result seems odd.
How to use: When a result surprises you, check the data before checking your assumption. Choose the answer that investigates, and reject any answer that changes a number to fit an expectation.
Exam Tip
Superadequacy is the concept behind most genuine negative adjustments. If the feature is expensive to own and exceeds what the neighborhood supports, a negative contribution is plausible rather than anomalous.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Flipping or zeroing an adjustment because its sign was unexpected
- -Failing to check for a confounding second difference before accepting a surprising result
- -Applying an adjustment that contradicts the workfile derivation
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
Contributory value is what the market pays for a component, and nothing guarantees it is positive. Features carry negative contributory value when the cost of owning them exceeds the benefit buyers perceive: an in-ground pool in a cold climate or a family-oriented market, an over-improved addition that pushes a house beyond the neighborhood's price ceiling, a converted garage that removed parking, a heated shop building that raises insurance and maintenance, or a superadequacy the market simply will not pay to maintain. When paired analysis produces a negative figure for an added feature, the appraiser faces a fork: either the market genuinely discounts the feature, or the pairs are contaminated by a second difference the analysis failed to isolate. Both possibilities are live, and only investigation distinguishes them. What is never acceptable is bending the data to match an expectation, because an adjustment must reflect what the market did rather than what the appraiser assumed it would do.
Background Knowledge
You need the concept of contributory value and the recognition that it can be negative, plus the definitions of superadequacy and over-improvement and the principle of conformity. You should also know that adjustments must be supported by market evidence and that the derivation must be documented in the workfile.
Real-World Application
An appraiser finds homes with in-ground pools selling $8,000 below comparable homes without them in a market of young families. She verifies the pairs are otherwise matched, interviews two listing agents who confirm buyers cite maintenance and safety concerns, applies the negative adjustment, and explains the market evidence in the report.
More Sales Comparison Questions
Excess land differs from surplus land in that excess land:
A paired sales analysis reveals that homes with stainless-steel appliances sell for $2,100 more than identical homes with standard appliances — but only when the homes are priced below $350,000. In the subject’s neighborhood, median sale price is $410,000. What is the appraiser’s obligation regarding the $2,100 appliance adjustment?
GLA differs by 210 sq ft between subject and comparable. Paired sales support $65 per sq ft of living area. The line adjustment is:
Paired sales are drawn from transactions six months apart in a stable market. The time adjustment needed is:
The most appropriate unit of comparison is determined by:
A comparable superior to the subject in every adjusted category should produce an indication that is:
Three sales support $520,000; the borrower's purchase contract is $505,000. May the appraisal conclude above the contract price?
A comparable sold for $300,000 with the seller carrying a loan 2 points below market, a benefit worth $8,000. What is its cash-equivalent price?
Why is a foreclosure sale generally a poor comparable in a stable market?
A comparable sold 8 months ago for $250,000 in a market appreciating 6% per year. What is the time-adjusted price?
People Also Study
Real Estate Market
13.6% of exam
Property Description
11.8% of exam
Land or Site Valuation
4.5% of exam
Cost Approach
13.6% of exam
Income Approach
8.2% of exam
Previous Question
A comparable sold for $300,000 with the seller carrying a loan 2 points below market, a benefit worth $8,000. What is its cash-equivalent price?
Next Question
Three comparables adjust to $412,000 (gross adj. 5%), $405,000 (gross adj. 22%), and $410,000 (gross adj. 8%). What is the best-supported value conclusion?