When so much wealth is tied up in one asset, the risk—or stability—of a local market can mean a lot to a homeowner.
Our measure of risk: Assuming buyers held on to their homes for five years before selling, what was their chance of suffering a loss? As a secondary criterion, we compared the worst annual losses homeowners in these markets have experienced since 1979.

20. Minneapolis- St. Paul, Minnesota
Risk of loss: 18.8%

19. Cleveland
Risk of loss: 20.5%

18. Washington, D.C.
Risk of loss: 20.5%

17. San Jose, California
Risk of loss: 21.4%

16. Las Vegas
Risk of loss: 21.4%

15. New Orleans
Risk of loss: 22.2%

14. Phoenix
Risk of loss: 22.2%

13. San Francisco
Risk of loss: 23.9%

12. Indianapolis
Risk of loss: 24.8%

11. Denver
Risk of loss: 27.4%

10. New York
Risk of loss: 27.4%

9. San Diego
Risk of loss: 27.4%

8. Sacramento, California
Risk of loss: 27.4%

7. Detroit
Risk of loss: 28.2%

6. Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas
Risk of loss: 29.1%

5. Los Angeles
Risk of loss: 29.1%

4. Boston
Risk of loss: 29.9%

3. Riverside, California
Risk of loss: 30.8%

2. Providence, Rhode Island
Risk of loss: 31.6%

1. Hartford, Connecticut
Risk of loss: 36.8%

And the most stable real estate markets?

5. Raleigh, North Carolina
Risk of loss: 9%

4. Nashville, Tennessee
Risk of loss: 9%

3. Louisville- Jefferson County, Kentucky
Risk of loss: 3%

2. Pittsburgh
Risk of loss: 0%

1. Buffalo, New York
Risk of loss: 0%

Methodology: For each of the 50 largest housing markets, Zillow.com analyzed average home prices over 117 rolling five year periods since 1979, as far back as reliable data go. The “risk of loss” is the percentage of those periods that created negative returns for homeowners. In the case of ties between markets, those with the bigger drop in their worst year were ranked as riskier. 

Original article by: Ben steverman- Bloomberg.com