Dubai Property Sales Comparables: How to Check the Data Behind a Price

1. Define the price question before collecting numbers

Start with a sentence that identifies the decision: what evidence supports the proposed price of this two-bedroom completed apartment? That is more useful than asking whether Dubai property is rising. The first question can be tested against a defined group; the second may combine very different properties and transactions.

DLD's public dashboard distinguishes sales, mortgages and gifts. DR's practical implication is to establish the category behind a headline before using it in a sale-price discussion. A total covering several categories is not automatically a measure of comparable home purchases.

Keep asking prices, recorded transactions and valuation opinions in separate columns. Label each figure by what it represents. A seller's requested price is evidence of the current offer; it should not be relabelled as an achieved sale. If a comparison arrives without its underlying definition, request that definition before interpreting the result.

References: DLD — Separate transaction dashboard categories

2. Establish what the public source actually provides

DLD's Real Estate Data page exposes date and property filters, together with transaction category, registration type, amount, project and size fields. Its English and Arabic interfaces provide a starting structure for reviewing a comparison.

For this article, DR reviewed those public interfaces. The browser returned headings and CAPTCHA messages, without populated transaction rows. We therefore do not claim to have downloaded sales, calculated a current median or verified a broker's selection.

Apply the same distinction to any report you receive. Ask whether its author used an official export, a third-party database or a screenshot. Record the source and retrieval date, and preserve the stated coverage. A visible search form does not prove that a particular result was obtained.

If the supporting rows cannot be supplied through an appropriate public or authorised source, describe the figure as unverified. An unsuccessful lookup does not establish that no transaction occurred.

References: DLD — Public Real Estate Data interface · DLD — Arabic public data interface

3. Match the period and preserve the cutoff

Write down the report publication date, the period analysed and the last included transaction date separately. Add the retrieval date so a later reviewer knows which version you used. A newly published page can discuss an earlier quarter, while a frequently updated page can still contain an incomplete month.

For a current example of this distinction, McCone Properties' October 2026 report reviewed for this article explicitly identifies 9 October as its cutoff and describes the month as incomplete. DR has not independently reproduced its figures and does not repeat them here.

DR recommends comparing equivalent periods and disclosing any difference in coverage. Do not calculate a monthly annual change by comparing nine days with a full prior month. If you extend the period to obtain more observations, state that change and retain the shorter-period result. Otherwise, the reader cannot tell whether a changed conclusion came from new evidence or a different window.

References: McCone Properties — Explicit partial-month and cutoff disclosure

4. Build a comparison worksheet before calculating an average

The following is DR's proposed working method, not an official DLD valuation standard. Set the selection rules before looking for the highest or lowest result. This makes the exercise reproducible and reduces the temptation to choose only transactions that support a preferred price.

Begin with the closest identifiable properties. Broaden one dimension at a time if evidence is sparse, and explain the trade-off. A longer period may introduce older conditions; a wider location may introduce different buildings. Neither change should disappear from the final summary.

References: DLD — Public data structure; worksheet is DR analysis

5. Check the denominator behind price per square foot

DLD's interface separately labels transaction size and property size in square metres. DR recommends confirming which area belongs with the quoted amount rather than assuming every size field is interchangeable.

For an entirely invented example, suppose a documented amount of AED1,200,000 covers the full interest in an apartment with a confirmed comparison area of 100 square metres. The result is AED12,000 per square metre. Using one square foot as 0.09290304 square metres, the area is approximately 1,076.39 square feet and the price approximately AED1,114.84 per square foot.

That arithmetic is meaningful only because the example explicitly matches the amount and area. For a real record, leave the calculation unresolved if the interest transferred, area basis or scope of the consideration is unclear.

Use consistent units throughout the comparison. Preserve the original figures, show the conversion and round only the displayed result. A precise-looking output cannot repair an uncertain input.

References: DLD — Separate size fields; numerical example is wholly hypothetical

6. Worked example: an average rises 50% while group prices stay unchanged

Consider two invented groups of equal-sized apartments. Every Group A sale is at AED1,000 per square foot in both periods. Every Group B sale is at AED2,000 per square foot in both periods. Only the number of sales in each group changes.

In Period 1, eight sales belong to A and two to B. In Period 2, two belong to A and eight to B. The arithmetic mean of the ten sale-level rates rises from AED1,200 to AED1,800 per square foot: a 50% increase. Yet neither group's rate changes.

This is a composition effect. It does not describe actual Dubai transactions. It demonstrates why a changing area average cannot, by itself, establish the price movement of a particular apartment.

A median is not immune: in this deliberately simple example, the middle observations also switch groups. DR therefore recommends showing the sample composition alongside the summary and comparing similar groups separately before discussing appreciation.

References: DLD — Transaction-data context; example and calculations are original DR analysis

7. Keep exclusions and unknown property differences visible

DR recommends an exclusion log alongside the retained observations. Record why an item was removed: a different property group, uncertain area, incompatible period or an apparent duplicate requiring clarification. Do not discard a low price merely because it is inconvenient, or retain a high price simply because it supports the asking price.

Treat repeated-looking records as a question before treating them as an error. Preserve their identifiers and seek an explanation of the source's treatment. Do not silently merge or delete them.

Next, list differences the available evidence does not explain. These may include condition, floor, view, occupancy, included contents, incentives or payment timing. Mark each as known, unknown or requiring separate verification.

Avoid inventing a universal adjustment for a better view or renovated kitchen. Without supporting evidence, a percentage adjustment merely adds another assumption. A smaller, well-explained comparison can be more useful than a larger table whose apparent precision hides substantial unknowns.

References: DLD — Source-interface context; selection and exclusion method is DR analysis

8. Keep market comparisons separate from valuation and project readiness

DLD provides a separate Property Valuation service whose issued document is an electronic valuation certificate. A self-prepared comparison worksheet is not that certificate. If a bank or another recipient requires a valuation, confirm its requirements directly.

DLD's Project Status Enquiry separately concerns project details and completion information. DR's implication is that a market comparison cannot establish the construction position of a development.

For an incoming investor examining a stalled project, label a completed-neighbour comparison as an assumption about a possible completed outcome. Do not apply it directly to the project's present position without assessing the remaining works, timing, costs and unresolved constraints.

Likewise, a buyer of a completed apartment should carry the price evidence into the separate review of the contract, property condition and ownership costs. A persuasive comparable does not answer those questions. Keep the supporting files connected while preserving the purpose of each.

References: DLD — Property Valuation service and electronic certificate · DLD — Project Status Enquiry scope

9. Finish with a short comparison brief

The useful output is a brief someone else can review: the question, source, dates, selection rules, retained sample, calculation and unresolved differences. State what the evidence supports and the next record needed. If the sample is too weak, say so rather than forcing a price conclusion.

A buyer can request this brief from the person presenting the comparison. A seller can use it to explain the basis of an asking price. A broker can disclose the selection method, while a developer can keep market assumptions separate from a completion budget.

Development Resolution can help organise public project information and evidence for a delayed or distressed project assessment. This article does not provide a property valuation, recommend an individual purchase price or guarantee a sale, financing decision or project outcome.

• Name the exact property and question.
• Identify the source and all relevant dates.
• Explain the included transaction and property groups.
• Show the sample size and exclusions.
• Match the amount to its area basis.
• Disclose the calculation and hypothetical assumptions.
• List unknown differences and the next verification step.

References: DLD — Public data source; final brief is DR's proposed method