# Making room for co-living in Singapore as investors commit, demand broadens

- **Source:** The Business Times
- **Published:** 2026-09-16T23:00:00.000Z
- **Author:** Christine Li
- **Original:** https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/property/making-room-co-living-singapore-investors-commit-demand-broadens
- **Topics:** Private Residential, Government & Policy, Transactions & Deals

## Featured rationale

The substantial supply-demand gap signals broadening renter demand and institutional confidence, potentially supporting further asset conversions, purpose-built developments and investment in professionally managed co-living.

## AI summary

Knight Frank estimates Singapore’s addressable co-living demand will reach about 45,840 keys by 2028, leaving a 32,840-key gap after projected supply growth.

## Original article

[SINGAPORE] Home ownership has long been the cornerstone of Singapore’s housing model, with nine in 10 resident households owning the homes they live in.

Against this backdrop, the emergence of a viable housing format built on shorter leases would have been less obvious a decade ago.

Yet, co-living has grown rapidly over the past five years, evolving from a niche accommodation concept into an increasingly visible segment of the country’s housing landscape.

The potential of this demand was amplified when construction delays and border disruptions hit during the pandemic. The reopening further fuelled a rapid recovery in international mobility, and rental market conditions tightened, as demand rose in multiple tenant groups.

Between 2022 and 2023, the private residential rental index of the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) spiked sharply, which at its peak rose by over 40 per cent.

Direct acquisitions of co-living assets climbed as operators sought to scale their portfolios, while a number of transactions for operating platforms, such as Mitsubishi Estate’s buyout of Habyt, also emerged.

Although deal volumes softened in 2025 amid a tightening supply of investable assets, conversion opportunities have revived activity in 2026.

In August 2026, CapitaLand Ascott Trust’s proposed S$134 million acquisition and leaseback of the 212-room Coliwoo Midtown offered a further sign of the sector’s growing institutional appeal.

The sector has continued to expand, even after rental market conditions began to normalise, suggesting that demand was supported by longer-term structural drivers rather than a temporary spurt.

While the surge in rental costs has made the sector more viable, its durability extends beyond operating margins.

Several factors have expanded the demand for flexible housing solutions in Singapore.

International student enrolments continued to grow, while Singapore’s international workforce has remained sizeable, with more than 200,000 Employment Pass holders.

The demand base is also broadening beyond the traditional expatriate and student segments.

A growing number of local residents are choosing to rent during different life stages, be it while waiting for a new home to be completed, to be closer to workplaces or to gain greater independence.

At the same time, trends in household formation have shifted. Single-person households now account for nearly one in six resident households. Notably, much of the rise recorded between 1980 and 2015 was repeated in just the last decade.

As more people choose to live alone, demand for smaller and more flexible housing options is likely to increase. In this respect, co-living makes sense, as the presence of a community and ready amenities can make compact living more appealing.

With the demand profile of renters becoming increasingly diverse, a rental stock predominantly made up of housing developed for ownership is unlikely to be an optimal solution.

An estimated 9,000 to 10,000 co-living keys are now operating on the island, while sustained investment interest signals its growing presence within Singapore’s housing market.

The growth of co-living indicates a broader shift in how housing is being consumed, as changing lifestyles and the way people live, work and play have contributed to a larger pool of renters.

For these groups, location, lease flexibility and ease of move-in can carry significant weight in housing decisions. These preferences align closely with the services typically offered by co-living operators.

Room rentals for co-living and private condominiums with similar attributes are generally competitive.

Headline co-living rents can be higher than conventional room rentals, but the comparison narrows once furnishings, utilities, connectivity, cleaning and shorter lease commitments are taken into account.

For anyone with shorter accommodation horizons, not having to navigate the intricacies of getting your own Wi-Fi and electricity is a big bonus.

The segment’s appeal also lies in its ability to serve multiple tenant groups through a single platform.

Each tenant group may have different housing requirements, but the preference for flexibility and convenience in a professionally managed living environment is widely shared in these groups.

This also allows operators to tap into several sources of demand, rather than relying on a single tenant profile.

Increasingly, co-living is finding its way into larger mixed-use developments alongside retail, co-working and other lifestyle amenities.

From integrated live-work concepts on Orchard Road to resort-style accommodation, co-living is increasingly being reimagined as a lifestyle offering, not just a housing solution.

This suggests a maturing sector that has moved beyond establishing viability, towards developing a differentiated product line with broader appeal.

This shift is further highlighted by the government’s recent policy adjustments.

At the National Day Rally (NDR) 2026, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced a major reset in public housing, raising the monthly income ceilings for Build-To-Order flats and executive condominiums to S$16,000 and S$18,000, respectively, alongside increased ballot priority for young families.

While this aggressive expansion of the public safety net ensures that subsidised home ownership remains attainable for the domestic core, the NDR left private rental dynamics and immediate alternative options for singles untouched.

By focusing heavily on the traditional family-centric home ownership model, state policy leaves a clear structural gap for non-traditional, transitional and single-person households.

Far from being a temporary post-pandemic fad, institutional co-living is firmly positioning itself as a necessary, market-driven pressure valve that addresses the exact segments of Singapore’s evolving demographic narrative that public policy has yet to fully capture.

Conscious of the steep run-up in rents amid tight market conditions, the government has actively sought to increase rental alternatives.

Aside from higher occupancy caps for larger Housing & Development Board flats and private residential properties, the introduction of the Serviced Apartments II (SA2) framework in 2023 also established a clear housing format that sits between traditional residential and hospitality uses.

While SA2 is fundamentally a new housing typology and development framework designed for purpose-built rental accommodation, co-living, in contrast, has largely emerged as an operating platform.

As such, it remains important to recognise that co-living is and should be viewed as part of a broader housing continuum, alongside conventional private rentals.

Much of the sector’s demand stems from the transitional nature of its tenants, who may eventually gravitate towards options that offer greater autonomy, privacy and control over their living environment.

Relative to conventional rentals, a higher tenant turnover is inherent to the co-living model.

Sustained demand will thus require the continual replenishment of its tenant base, supported by Singapore’s continued appeal as a global city.

Still, what is clear is that the sector has matured and is attracting investment commitments.

A growing track record of operating performance, an expanding occupier base and policy initiatives, such as youth independent-living pilots, have strengthened the sector’s investment case.

The sector has also demonstrated that growth can be achieved through the repositioning of existing assets.

By converting and adapting underutilised buildings, operators have been able to scale in a land-constrained market. This has broadened the range of opportunities available to investors, from direct asset acquisitions and conversions to leasing heritage developments.

This is particularly relevant in the current higher interest rate environment, as co-living offers multiple avenues for value creation, from asset repositioning and adaptive reuse to operational execution.

As prospects for further yield compression narrow, these characteristics are becoming increasingly important drivers of returns.

Underlying these opportunities is a larger and more diversified tenant base, which is indicative of the sector’s strengthening demand fundamentals.

The continued gap between existing supply and addressable demand, which refers to the pool of occupiers that could be accommodated by institutional-grade or professionally managed co-living assets, further highlights the scope for continued expansion.

Based on the size and income profile of key renter groups, Knight Frank estimated that Singapore’s addressable demand for co-living will reach about 45,840 keys by 2028.

With total co-living keys likely to increase by just about 3,000 to 4,000 in the same period, a market gap of 32,840 keys remains.

As occupier needs become more varied and rental demand increasingly extends beyond traditional leasing models, co-living is assuming a more prominent role within the residential landscape.

For investors, the sector offers exposure to these changing housing dynamics through an asset class that is moving beyond its niche origins.

Singapore should now recognise professionally managed rental housing as a deliberate part of its broader housing and talent strategy.

Policymakers can create clearer pathways for converting suitable buildings and developing purpose-built rental accommodation.

Owners, operators and investors, in turn, must demonstrate that the model can also deliver quality, transparency and a consistently good living experience, not simply more rooms.

The choice is not between co-living and homeownership. It is whether Singapore’s housing system can offer enough flexibility between them.

Making room for co-living would help close that gap, and ensure that housing options continue to evolve with the people and economy they seek to attract and support.

The winners will not simply be those that add the most rooms, but also those that combine the right locations with disciplined operations and a consistently good resident experience.

The writer is the head of research, Asia-Pacific at Knight Frank

## Chinese translation

> Translation model: openai_codex_cli

### 随着投资者加码、需求扩大，新加坡为共居腾出空间

新加坡应为改造和开发创造更清晰的路径

[新加坡] 住房自有长期以来一直是新加坡住房模式的基石，每 10 个居民家庭中就有 9 个拥有其居住的住房。

在这样的背景下，十年前，一个建立在较短租期之上的可行住房形态的出现，原本并不那么显而易见。

然而，共居在过去五年迅速发展，从一个小众住宿概念演变为新加坡住房格局中日益显眼的一个板块。

当疫情期间建筑延误和边境中断出现时，这类需求的潜力被进一步放大。重新开放进一步推动了国际流动性的快速复苏，随着多个租户群体需求上升，租赁市场状况趋紧。

2022 年至 2023 年间，市区重建局（URA）的私人住宅租金指数大幅飙升，峰值涨幅超过 40%。

随着运营商寻求扩大其投资组合，共居资产的直接收购增加，同时也出现了一些运营平台交易，例如三菱地所收购 Habyt。

尽管 2025 年可投资资产供应收紧导致交易量放缓，但改造机会在 2026 年重新带动了市场活动。

2026 年 8 月，凯德雅诗阁信托拟以 1.34 亿新元收购并回租拥有 212 间客房的 Coliwoo Midtown，进一步显示出该板块对机构投资者的吸引力正在增强。

即便在租赁市场状况开始正常化之后，该板块仍持续扩张，显示需求受到更长期结构性驱动因素的支撑，而非一时的增长冲动。

尽管租金成本激增使该板块更具可行性，但其持久性并不只体现在经营利润率上。

若干因素扩大了新加坡对灵活住房解决方案的需求。

国际学生入学人数持续增长，而新加坡的国际劳动力规模仍然可观，持有就业准证（Employment Pass）的人数超过 200,000 人。

需求基础也正在从传统的外籍人士和学生群体之外进一步扩大。

越来越多本地居民正在不同人生阶段选择租房，无论是在等待新房完工期间、为了更靠近工作地点，还是为了获得更大的独立性。

与此同时，家庭组成趋势也发生了变化。单人家庭目前占居民家庭的近六分之一。值得注意的是，1980 年至 2015 年间录得的增长，很大一部分仅在过去十年中再次出现。

随着更多人选择独居，对较小且更灵活住房选择的需求可能增加。在这方面，共居是合理的，因为社区的存在和现成设施能够让紧凑型居住更具吸引力。

随着租户需求特征变得日益多元，主要由为自住开发的住房构成的租赁存量，不太可能成为最优解决方案。

估计目前全岛运营中的共居房源约有 9,000 至 10,000 间，而持续的投资兴趣显示其在新加坡住房市场中的存在感正在增强。

共居的增长表明，住房消费方式正在发生更广泛的转变，因为生活方式以及人们生活、工作和娱乐方式的变化，促成了更庞大的租房人群。

对这些群体而言，地点、租期灵活性和入住便利性在住房决策中可能具有相当重要的分量。这些偏好与共居运营商通常提供的服务高度一致。

具有类似属性的共居房间租金和私人公寓房间租金通常具有竞争力。

共居的标价租金可能高于传统房间租赁，但一旦将家具、公共事业费用、网络连接、清洁以及较短租期承诺纳入考量，差距就会缩小。

对于任何住宿周期较短的人来说，不必处理自行申请 Wi-Fi 和电力服务的繁琐细节，是一项很大的优势。

该板块的吸引力还在于，它能够通过单一平台服务多个租户群体。

每个租户群体可能有不同的住房需求，但在专业管理的居住环境中对灵活性和便利性的偏好，在这些群体中普遍存在。

这也让运营商能够触及多个需求来源，而不是依赖单一租户画像。

共居正越来越多地进入较大型综合用途开发项目，与零售、共享办公和其他生活方式设施并存。

从乌节路上的综合居住-工作概念，到度假式住宿，共居正越来越多地被重新想象为一种生活方式产品，而不只是住房解决方案。

这显示该板块正在走向成熟，已经从确立可行性，迈向开发具有更广泛吸引力的差异化产品线。

政府近期的政策调整进一步凸显了这一转变。

在 2026 年国庆群众大会（NDR）上，总理黄循财宣布对公共住房进行重大重设，将预购组屋和执行共管公寓的月收入顶限分别提高至 16,000 新元和 18,000 新元，同时提高年轻家庭的抽签优先权。

尽管这种对公共安全网的积极扩展确保补贴自有住房仍可为本地核心群体所负担，但国庆群众大会并未触及私人租赁动态，也未为单身人士提供即时替代选择。

国家政策高度聚焦传统的以家庭为中心的住房自有模式，为非传统、过渡性和单人家庭留下了清晰的结构性缺口。

机构化共居远非疫情后一时的风潮，而是正在稳固地将自身定位为一个必要的、由市场驱动的压力阀，回应新加坡不断演变的人口叙事中公共政策尚未充分覆盖的那些具体群体。

政府意识到在市场紧张情况下租金大幅上涨，因此一直积极寻求增加租赁替代选择。

除了提高较大型建屋发展局组屋和私人住宅物业的入住人数上限外，2023 年推出的服务式公寓 II（SA2）框架，也确立了一种介于传统住宅和酒店用途之间的清晰住房形态。

虽然 SA2 本质上是一种为专门建造的租赁住宿而设计的新住房类型和开发框架，但相比之下，共居很大程度上是作为一种运营平台出现的。

因此，仍然有必要认识到，共居是、也应被视为更广泛住房连续体的一部分，与传统私人租赁并列。

该板块的许多需求源自其租户的过渡性质，他们最终可能会转向能够在居住环境上提供更大自主性、隐私和控制权的选择。

相较传统租赁，共居模式天然具有更高的租户流动率。

因此，持续需求将需要不断补充其租户基础，并由新加坡作为全球城市的持续吸引力支撑。

不过，明确的是，该板块已经成熟，并正在吸引投资承诺。

不断增长的运营表现记录、扩大的租户基础，以及青年独立生活试点等政策举措，已经增强了该板块的投资理由。

该板块也已经证明，可以通过重新定位现有资产来实现增长。

通过改造和适配利用不足的建筑，运营商得以在土地受限的市场中扩大规模。这拓宽了投资者可获得的机会范围，从直接资产收购和改造，到租赁历史建筑开发项目。

在当前较高利率环境下，这一点尤其相关，因为共居提供了多种创造价值的途径，从资产重新定位和适应性再利用，到运营执行。

随着进一步收益率压缩的前景收窄，这些特征正成为越来越重要的回报驱动因素。

这些机会的基础，是一个更大且更多元化的租户群体，这表明该板块的需求基本面正在增强。

现有供应与可触及需求之间持续存在的差距，进一步凸显了继续扩张的空间；可触及需求指的是能够由机构级或专业管理共居资产容纳的租户群体。

根据主要租房群体的规模和收入特征，莱坊估计，到 2028 年，新加坡共居的可触及需求将达到约 45,840 间。

由于同期共居房源总数可能仅增加约 3,000 至 4,000 间，市场仍存在 32,840 间的缺口。

随着住户需求变得更加多样化，租赁需求也越来越超越传统租赁模式，共居正在住宅格局中承担更突出的角色。

对投资者而言，该板块通过一种正在超越小众起源的资产类别，提供了参与这些变化中住房动态的机会。

新加坡现在应将专业管理租赁住房视为其更广泛住房和人才战略中的一个有意为之的组成部分。

政策制定者可以为合适建筑的改造以及专门建造的租赁住宿开发创造更清晰的路径。

业主、运营商和投资者则必须证明，该模式不仅能够提供更多房间，也能够提供质量、透明度和持续良好的居住体验。

问题并不在于在共居和住房自有之间二选一，而在于新加坡的住房体系能否在两者之间提供足够的灵活性。

为共居腾出空间将有助于弥合这一缺口，并确保住房选择继续随着其力图吸引和支持的人群与经济而演变。

赢家不会只是那些增加最多房间的人，也会是那些将合适地点、严谨运营和持续良好住户体验结合起来的人。

作者是莱坊亚太区研究主管