California Eviction Risk: Very High
California spans 1,594 covered cities across 58 counties, with a statewide composite of 9.8/10 (very high). Scores range 6.2 to 9.9 across cities, and the share of income spent on rent, political climate, and statute weighting drive most of the variance.
National rank: 2 of 51
California eviction risk score history
Key metrics
-
Tenant beats landlord58.5%/ 100 outcomesIn court-decided eviction outcomes for California, tenants prevail in roughly 58.5% of contested cases. A higher number means landlords face stronger tenant defenses and longer calendars.
-
Timeline270dfiling → judgmentFrom the moment an unlawful-detainer notice is filed in California until a money judgment is entered, a contested eviction takes about 270 days on average. Longer timelines mean more lost rent for landlords.
-
Cost range$15.1–34.3klegal + lost rentA typical eviction in California costs landlords $15,095 to $34,288 all-in, covering court filing fees, process-server costs, attorney time, and lost rent.
-
Average rent$2,10233% stretched on rentAverage gross rent in California is $2,102 per month per the U.S. Census American Community Survey. 33% of renter households here spend more than 30% of pre-tax income on rent.
-
Renters44.6%of households44.6% of occupied housing units in California are renter-occupied. A higher renter share usually correlates with more eviction filings and a more active rental market.
-
Poverty12.1%6.5% unemp.12.1% of California residents live below the federal poverty line, and unemployment runs at 6.5%. Both feed the economic-stress sub-score in our Eviction Risk Score model.
Scrub 50 years
California's 8/10 ranks 4th of 51 states; within the state, scores run from a 3.5 floor in the rural interior to 9.2 in San Francisco County. 4th-toughest of 51 states for landlord eviction risk.
How California ranks nationally
Landlord guides for California
| County↕ | Population↕ | Risk↕ | Lean↕ | Renters↕ | % income on rent↕ | Avg rent↕ | Poverty↕ | Cities↕ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | San Francisco County | 830,235 | 9.7 | Dem | 61.8% | 25.1% | $2,476 | 10.6% | 1 |
| 02 | Los Angeles County | 9.74M | 8.9 | Dem | 53.3% | 34.3% | $2,008 | 13.7% | 144 |
| 03 | Santa Clara County | 1.79M | 8.7 | Dem | 44.1% | 28.6% | $2,829 | 7.0% | 22 |
| 04 | Fresno County | 905,932 | 8.6 | Dem | 46.1% | 33.1% | $1,414 | 19.3% | 45 |
| 05 | Alameda County | 1.65M | 8.6 | Dem | 44.8% | 30.2% | $2,446 | 9.3% | 21 |
| 06 | Imperial County | 164,040 | 8.6 | Dem | 44.5% | 32.1% | $1,076 | 19.9% | 19 |
| 07 | Merced County | 244,698 | 8.4 | Dem | 46.3% | 31.7% | $1,373 | 18.8% | 24 |
| 08 | Sacramento County | 1.58M | 8.4 | Dem | 40.6% | 33.0% | $1,866 | 12.6% | 35 |
| 09 | San Diego County | 3.07M | 8.3 | Dem | 46.3% | 34.0% | $2,275 | 10.5% | 56 |
| 10 | Mendocino County | 44,047 | 8.3 | Dem | 47.3% | 35.0% | $1,341 | 15.3% | 23 |
| 11 | Humboldt County | 111,307 | 8.2 | Dem | 46.3% | 36.9% | $1,357 | 19.4% | 39 |
| 12 | San Joaquin County | 724,017 | 8.2 | Dem | 38.4% | 32.6% | $1,898 | 12.4% | 28 |
| 13 | Tulare County | 409,774 | 8.2 | Rep | 42.6% | 32.1% | $1,313 | 17.8% | 60 |
| 14 | Santa Cruz County | 224,718 | 8.2 | Dem | 42.0% | 32.2% | $2,268 | 11.7% | 33 |
| 15 | Marin County | 239,409 | 8.2 | Dem | 35.2% | 33.4% | $2,765 | 8.4% | 30 |
| 16 | Monterey County | 360,373 | 8.2 | Dem | 51.2% | 32.5% | $2,042 | 13.2% | 25 |
| 17 | Lake County | 52,974 | 8.2 | Dem | 29.5% | 37.6% | $1,487 | 17.6% | 15 |
| 18 | Napa County | 124,412 | 8.1 | Dem | 37.8% | 33.7% | $2,281 | 8.6% | 14 |
| 19 | Solano County | 439,396 | 8.1 | Dem | 37.2% | 35.2% | $2,173 | 9.7% | 11 |
| 20 | Contra Costa County | 1.23M | 8.1 | Dem | 33.9% | 33.5% | $2,550 | 8.2% | 50 |
| City↕ | Population↕ | Risk↕ | Lean↕ | Renters↕ | % income on rent↕ | Avg rent↕ | Poverty↕ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Los Angeles | 3,857,263 | 9.9 | Dem | 64.0% | 35.0% | $1,933 | 16.6% |
| 02 | Oakland | 439,418 | 9.9 | Dem | 57.7% | 30.6% | $1,979 | 13.7% |
| 03 | San Francisco | 830,235 | 9.7 | Dem | 61.8% | 25.1% | $2,476 | 10.6% |
| 04 | Long Beach | 455,548 | 9.6 | Dem | 58.8% | 32.8% | $1,871 | 15.0% |
| 05 | San Jose | 990,138 | 9.2 | Dem | 44.2% | 30.1% | $2,669 | 7.9% |
| 06 | Sacramento | 528,706 | 9.2 | Dem | 48.3% | 32.8% | $1,779 | 14.4% |
| 07 | Santa Ana | 312,534 | 9.0 | Dem | 55.4% | 31.9% | $2,082 | 11.1% |
| 08 | Fresno | 545,970 | 8.9 | Dem | 49.9% | 34.1% | $1,421 | 20.9% |
| 09 | Willowbrook | 21,681 | 8.9 | Dem | 57.2% | 34.5% | $1,570 | 17.0% |
| 10 | Florence-Graham | 60,690 | 8.8 | Dem | 63.4% | 35.7% | $1,521 | 21.4% |
| 11 | Huntington Park | 53,108 | 8.8 | Dem | 75.8% | 34.2% | $1,505 | 17.6% |
| 12 | Calipatria | 6,548 | 8.8 | Dem | 35.9% | 32.4% | $919 | 25.2% |
| 13 | Lucerne Valley | 5,957 | 8.8 | Dem | 24.5% | 51.0% | $1,181 | 35.6% |
| 14 | San Diego | 1,389,526 | 8.7 | Dem | 52.7% | 32.4% | $2,313 | 11.1% |
| 15 | El Centro | 44,240 | 8.7 | Dem | 50.5% | 32.2% | $1,052 | 20.1% |
| 16 | Calexico | 38,585 | 8.7 | Dem | 49.8% | 36.0% | $1,093 | 21.0% |
| 17 | Adelanto | 37,964 | 8.7 | Dem | 38.1% | 36.2% | $1,437 | 16.4% |
| 18 | Isla Vista | 13,920 | 8.7 | Dem | 98.8% | 51.0% | $1,878 | 69.3% |
| 19 | Orange Cove | 9,695 | 8.7 | Dem | 56.9% | 45.3% | $1,103 | 39.0% |
| 20 | Orosi | 8,966 | 8.7 | Rep | 44.4% | 31.2% | $1,204 | 24.7% |
| 21 | Merced | 91,953 | 8.6 | Dem | 54.1% | 32.7% | $1,393 | 23.0% |
| 22 | Beverly Hills | 31,624 | 8.6 | Dem | 59.0% | 33.0% | $2,830 | 9.0% |
| 23 | Barstow | 25,100 | 8.6 | Dem | 56.3% | 31.2% | $1,091 | 23.2% |
| 24 | Ashland | 22,210 | 8.6 | Dem | 64.9% | 35.7% | $2,110 | 16.2% |
Statewide heatmap
Cost of living in California
California is the most expensive of 51 states overall (10.7% more expensive than the U.S. average). For housing services, it ranks #2 of 51 states, the single biggest driver of rent-to-income ratio statewide.
Peer states
California eviction rules at a glance
What every California landlord operates under.
California rates High for landlord-side eviction risk, with a statewide average of 8 out of 10 across its 1,594 cities. That is the 4th-toughest reading of the 51 states and DC we score, and it reflects a stack of tenant protections that few other states match: statewide rent caps under AB 1482, just-cause termination rules, and courts that read procedural defects strictly.
Roughly 44.6% of California households rent, and the typical renter spends about 33.2% of income on housing at an average rent near $2,102 a month. Those cost pressures, combined with active tenant-defense organizations in the major metros, are what push contested cases long and make airtight paperwork the difference between a clean possession and a dismissed filing.
How eviction works in California
California eviction is an unlawful detainer action governed by the Code of Civil Procedure. For nonpayment of rent the first step is a 3-day notice to pay or quit (CCP section 1161(2)), and the demand has to state the exact rent owed, not late fees or a running balance, or it can be voided on its face. A curable lease violation uses a 3-day notice to perform or quit (CCP section 1161(3)); serious incurable conduct uses a 3-day unconditional quit (CCP section 1161(4)). Ending a tenancy without fault takes a 30-day notice under one year or a 60-day notice at one year or more (Civil Code section 1946.1), and where AB 1482 just-cause applies, a no-fault termination requires a 60-day notice plus relocation assistance under Civil Code section 1946.2. An uncontested case typically runs 35 to 60 days from notice to lockout; a contested one runs 75 to 180 days.
What an eviction costs
Court and enforcement fees are modest: a filing fee of $240 to $435 and a sheriff lockout fee of $75 to $145. The real money is legal time and lost rent. A contested California case with counsel runs roughly $1,500 to $4,500 in attorney fees on top of the rent that goes uncollected across a 75 to 180 day timeline. At an average rent near $2,102 a month, the lost-rent line usually dwarfs the court costs.
Rent control and just cause
AB 1482 (Civil Code section 1947.12) caps annual rent increases at 5% plus CPI, with a hard ceiling of 10%, on most units more than 15 years old. Just-cause protection under Civil Code section 1946.2 means a landlord generally needs a legally specified reason to end a covered tenancy. The Costa-Hawkins Act limits but does not preempt local rent control, so cities can layer their own stricter ordinances on top of the state floor. Forgetting the relocation payment on a no-fault termination is its own cause of action: a tenant can recover damages without ever winning the possession case.
Tenant protections landlords must respect
California requires 24 hours of advance notice before entry, enforces the implied warranty of habitability (Civil Code section 1941), and bars retaliation (Civil Code section 1942.5). Source-of-income discrimination is illegal, so a landlord cannot refuse a Section 8 voucher (Government Code section 12927, SB 329). Screening is constrained too: blanket criminal-history bans are prohibited under FEHA, and application fees are capped near $62.22 and adjusted annually (Civil Code section 1950.6). Fair-housing enforcement runs through the California Civil Rights Department.
Where risk concentrates
Risk is not evenly spread. San Francisco County tops the state at 9.2 and Los Angeles County reads 7.4, while the statewide floor sits at 3.5 in the rural interior. At the city level, San Francisco eviction risk (9.2), Los Angeles eviction risk (9.1), and Oakland eviction risk (9.1) are the hardest places in California to operate as a landlord; San Jose eviction risk and Long Beach eviction risk both read 8.4.
Against its western neighbors, California is the most tenant-protective by a wide margin. Its 8/10 sits well above Oregon (6.6), Colorado (5.9), Washington (5.7), New Mexico (5.4), and Nevada (5.1). Every one of those states has lighter rent-cap and just-cause exposure, so a landlord moving a portfolio across the California line typically trades a faster, cheaper process for a slower, defense-heavy one.