# JLL — Perspectives on New Zealand’s Retirement Villages (December 2025 Review)

Document ID: doc-0511  
Publisher: JLL  
Report cover/publication month: December 2025  
Database reference period: year ending December 2024  
Original brief access label: August 2026  
Evidence reviewed: 9 October 2026  
Source original: 18 physical PDF pages; this file remains an editorial Markdown brief

Primary report: [JLL PDF, hosted by the Retirement Villages Association](https://www.retirementvillages.org.nz/common/Uploaded%20files/Document%20Library/JLLinsightsretirementvillagesmarketreview.pdf)

Publisher host listing: [RVA document library](https://www.retirementvillages.org.nz/Public/Public/Resources-and-Media/Document-Library.aspx)

## What the report contributes

JLL’s December 2025 market review uses its retirement-village database for the year ending December 2024: 491 villages and 43,598 units. The six largest groups controlled 27,318 units, or 63% of all units, despite operating 44% of villages. It reports 91% average occupancy across those operators and models a 23,241-unit national shortfall by 2048 under explicit assumptions. This retained editorial brief summarises that report; the report’s publication month, database reference year and August 2026 brief access label are separate dates.

## Key findings

- The national market comprised 491 retirement villages and 43,598 units at December 2024.
- The six largest operators averaged 91% occupancy; this is not a national-market occupancy figure.
- The six largest groups controlled 27,318 units, or 63% of the national unit market, across 44% of villages.
- Since JLL began publishing the series in 2012, village numbers rose from 343 to 491 and units from 21,815 to 43,598 by December 2024; this comparison spans twelve years.
- JLL reports national 75+ penetration of 14.7% in 2024, up from 14.0% in 2023.
- JLL models a 23,241-unit shortfall by 2048 under stated pipeline, stable regional-penetration and 1.3-residents-per-unit assumptions; care suites are excluded.

## Dates and edition verification

The checked primary PDF’s cover says Research New Zealand, December 2025 and identifies the NZRVD reference period as the year ending December 2024. RVA’s library independently lists Research December 2025. The existing brief’s headline totals, big-six occupancy and 2048 shortfall agree with that original. The former November 2025 date is not supported by either source. The checked PDF does not print a 12th-edition designation, so the catalogue title now uses the verifiable report title and month. The original filename retains that earlier label as capture provenance.

There is no bundled JLL original PDF for this record: it was an editorial brief. No older PDF was overwritten or replaced. The report was read from the primary publisher-hosted fixture (18 pages; 10,468,669 bytes; SHA-256 7be85300874cf3038129cf5795eb5d6128bd717ac4475f6c97acddfdf5643dc6). An exact publication day is not established. The August 2026 access label is preserved and the October review records verification separately. The original JLL landing URL returned a timeout during this review; the checked RVA-hosted report provides the direct evidence.

## Where to check the original

Physical page 1: report month and database reference period. Page 2: headline villages, units, big-six units and occupancy. Page 4: series growth since 2012. Page 9: national and regional penetration. Pages 14–16: modelled 2048 shortfall and assumptions.

## Evidence limits

Editorial Markdown brief with an August 2026 access label, checked against the matching eighteen-page JLL original hosted by the Retirement Villages Association. The PDF cover says December 2025 and year ending December 2024; the headline totals, occupancy and 2048 shortfall match this brief. The former November 2025 catalogue date and 12th-edition title label are not substantiated by the checked original. The growth comparison starts in 2012, rather than spanning a decade. These corrections do not replace a bundled PDF. Big-six occupancy is not national occupancy, and the 2048 unit shortfall is modelled village-unit demand, not observed shortage or aged-care bed demand. The national penetration measure is not a health outcome or an estimate of willingness to pay for a new service. The market review does not establish demand for PiP, its effectiveness or commercial conversion rates.