A smart 0–100 investment signal built from seven objective data points. Designed to help foreign investors quickly identify where to spend research time — not where to spend money.
The Pulse Score is TokyoInvestor’s smart investment signal — a number from 0 to 100 that summarises how a property compares across seven objective factors that matter most to long-term property investors in Tokyo.
It is not a recommendation to buy. It is a starting point for deeper research.
70–100 points
Strong across most signals. Worth deeper research.
50–69 points
Mixed signals. Some strong factors offset by weaknesses.
0–49 points
Multiple risk factors present. Review the breakdown carefully.
Maximum 100 base points across seven components, with size-penalty and price-ceiling adjustments applied after.
We calculate each listing’s price per m² (floor area first; land area as fallback) and compare it to the ward’s median price per m² from our benchmark data (live MLIT transaction data coming soon). If floor area is unavailable, a neutral 10pts is applied.
| More than 20% below ward median/m² | 20 |
| 10–20% below ward median/m² | 14 |
| Within 10% of ward median/m² | 8 |
| 10–20% above ward median/m² | 2 |
| More than 20% above ward median/m² | 0 |
Why it matters
Comparing total price to median total price is misleading — it penalises large properties and rewards small overpriced ones. Price per m² normalises for size, making the comparison meaningful.
Tokyo property values are tightly correlated with walking distance to the nearest train station. We use the walk time listed on SUUMO.
| 5 minutes or less | 15 |
| 6–10 minutes | 11 |
| 11–15 minutes | 7 |
| 16–20 minutes | 3 |
| Over 20 minutes | 0 |
Why it matters
Station proximity directly affects both resale value and rental yield. In Tokyo, each additional minute of walk time meaningfully impacts price.
Japan’s 1981 building code revision (新耐震基準, New Seismic Standard) is the most important structural dividing line. Post-2000 buildings meet modern standards.
| 2020 or newer | 15 |
| 2010–2019 | 11 |
| 2000–2009 | 8 |
| 1990–1999 | 4 |
| Pre-1990 | 2 |
Why it matters
Older buildings carry higher maintenance costs, more complex rebuild rules, and stricter financing constraints for foreign buyers. Pre-1990 buildings can still be good investments — this signal reflects structural risk, not absolute value.
Whether the property comes with full land ownership (所有権 freehold) or a ground lease arrangement (借地権 leasehold) significantly affects long-term value and financing options.
| Freehold (所有権) | 15 |
| Leasehold (借地権) | 0 |
Why it matters
Leasehold properties in Japan come with land lease fees, fixed-term contracts, and significantly reduced resale markets. For foreign investors without local legal support, freehold is strongly preferable.
Whether the existing building can legally be demolished and rebuilt. Non-rebuildable properties (再建築不可) typically face road frontage restrictions under current building codes.
| Rebuild permitted | 10 |
| Rebuild restrictions apply | 0 |
Why it matters
Many older Tokyo properties sit on land classified as 再建築不可 (non-rebuildable) — typically because the road frontage is too narrow under current codes. These properties cannot be demolished and rebuilt, limiting long-term value and making financing difficult.
We estimate gross rental yield using ward-level rental benchmarks (rent per m² per month) applied to the property’s floor area and asking price. This is an estimate, not a verified rental listing. Actual rent depends on condition, fit-out, management quality, and market timing.
| Est. gross yield ≥ 6.0% | 15 |
| Est. gross yield 4.5%–5.9% | 12 |
| Est. gross yield 3.5%–4.4% | 8 |
| Est. gross yield 2.5%–3.4% | 4 |
| Est. gross yield < 2.5% | 0 |
| Floor area data unavailable | 5 (neutral) |
Why it matters
Gross yield is the primary lens through which income-focused investors evaluate Tokyo property. Even if you don't plan to rent, yield reflects whether the price is supported by the property's income potential.
Japan’s Minpaku law (民泊新法) allows short-term rentals nationally for up to 180 days per year, but individual wards impose tighter rules. This signal scores ward-level permissiveness only. Building bylaws (管理規約) can prohibit STR even in a permissive ward — always verify with building management before purchasing for rental purposes.
| Permissive ward — up to 180 days/yr | 10 |
| Moderate ward restrictions | 6 |
| Significant ward restrictions | 3 |
Why it matters
Short-term rental income can significantly improve gross yield. But STR eligibility varies widely by ward. This signal scores how permissive the ward is — not whether this specific property can operate STR.
Applied after the seven signals are summed. These prevent micro-properties and ultra-premium listings from scoring deceptively high.
The score penalises small properties at high price points, which typically have limited resale audiences in Tokyo. Micro-properties appeal to a narrow buyer pool and carry higher vacancy risk for rental investors.
| Floor area < 25 m² | −15 pts |
| Floor area < 40 m² AND price > ¥5,000万 | −10 pts |
| All other sizes | 0 pts |
Why it matters
A 20m² studio near Shinjuku might be freehold, near a station, and newly built — scoring well on all seven signals. But if it’s priced at ¥6,000万, it’s expensive per m² and has a very thin resale market. The penalty reflects this structural risk.
Properties priced above ¥200,000,000 (¥2億) cannot score above 65, keeping them in the “Consider” tier at best. Very expensive properties have thinner buyer pools, longer typical exit timelines, and higher sensitivity to macro conditions.
Why it matters
This is not a statement that expensive properties are bad investments. It reflects the additional due diligence required at high price points — liquidity, financing options for foreign buyers, and exit market depth all need careful verification.
Leasehold (借地権) properties earn 0 of the ownership points and take a further −15 point penalty (−10 for land), capped at a total of 55 — they cannot reach the “Strong” tier. You own the building but lease the land: most Japanese banks will not finance it, ground rent and renewal fees apply, and the resale market is far thinner.
Why it matters
A high headline score on a leasehold property is misleading — the financing and exit constraints are structural, not cosmetic. The penalty keeps leasehold out of “Strong” so the score reflects the real risk.
Vacant land uses a dedicated 6-signal model — there is no building age, rental-yield or STR signal. Instead it weighs development potential, plot size, zoning and rebuild rights (100 points total), then adjusts for the MLIT fair-value gap so the score and the valuation can never contradict each other.
Land ¥/m² vs the ward MLIT land median — ≤75% of median scores full, >110% scores zero. Where MLIT zoning gives a FAR (容積率), this compares price per buildable m² (land × FAR) against a 200%-FAR baseline, rewarding high-density plots.
New structure permitted = full; unverified scores just 3 — most land should have this confirmed.
Walking minutes to the nearest station (≤5 min scores full).
Buildable plot area — ≥150m² is strong development potential; under 50m² scores zero.
Uses real MLIT zoning (用途地域) when available: Commercial zones score highest (hotel & mixed-use eligible), down to low-rise/agricultural residential-exclusive zones lowest. Falls back to ward investment grade when zoning is unmapped.
Freehold (所有権) land title scores full; leasehold or unverified scores zero.
Price vs MLIT fair value. After the six signals are summed, the score is adjusted for how far the asking price sits from the MLIT fair value (ward median ¥/m² × land area). This is the guardrail against a high-FAR plot looking cheap per buildable m² while being far over fair value.
Applied only when MLIT ward data is available; the ¥200M ceiling below is applied after this.
¥200M price ceiling. Land priced above ¥200,000,000 is capped at a total score of 60 — ultra-premium plots have a thinner buyer pool and longer exit timelines.
Ward data is estimated
Until our MLIT API integration goes live, price comparisons are based on benchmark estimates, not verified transaction records.
The score is purely quantitative
It cannot assess renovation quality, neighbourhood character, management company reputation, or dozens of other factors experienced buyers consider.
A low score is not a red flag — it is a prompt
A pre-1990 leasehold property near Shibuya station might score 35 and still be a compelling buy for the right investor with the right legal team.
Always verify independently
Use a licensed real estate agent (宅建士), a judicial scrivener (司法書士), and ideally a building inspector before committing to any purchase.
Most Tokyo property portals show you listings. They don’t help you compare them. As a foreign investor, you are operating in a language you may not read, in a legal system you may not understand, evaluating buildings under seismic codes you have never encountered.
The Pulse Score gives you a fast, honest signal to decide where to spend your research time — not where to spend your money. That decision still takes a professional.
Data sourced from SUUMO public listings. Ward benchmarks based on internal estimates; live MLIT transaction data coming soon. Last updated: June 2026.
TokyoInvestor is not a licensed real estate brokerage. This score is for research purposes only.