I'm going to say something that will upset a certain type of person: Frisco might be overrated.
Not bad. Not declining. Not a place you shouldn't live. Just... overrated. As in: the price you pay already reflects everything good about it, plus a brand premium that may or may not be justified by what you actually get.
Meanwhile, Richardson—a city that doesn't trend on Twitter and doesn't have a professional sports complex—is quietly doing the boring work of rebuilding itself. And boring infrastructure work, in my experience, tends to show up in home values eventually.
This is not investment advice. This is pattern recognition. Make of it what you will.
What "Overrated" Actually Means
Let me be precise, because "overrated" is a word that makes people defensive.
I'm not saying Frisco is bad. The schools are excellent. The amenities are legitimate. The Star exists and is genuinely impressive. If you want to live in Frisco and can afford it, you'll probably be happy there.
What I'm saying is: the market has already priced in all of that. When you buy in Frisco in 2025, you're paying for:
- •The brand recognition ("Oh, Frisco! Great schools!")
- •The past appreciation (which was real and substantial)
- •The expectation that what happened before will continue happening
That last part is the tricky one. Frisco in 2015 was early-innings growth. Land was cheap. Schools were uncrowded. Traffic was manageable. The $5 Billion Mile was still a pitch deck.
Frisco in 2025 is different. The city is 85% built out. School enrollment is straining capacity. Traffic on 121 and the Tollway is... well, you've driven it. The growth story isn't over, but it's definitely in the later chapters.
(I should note that Frisco people will object to this characterization. They'll point to Fields development and the PGA complex and the ongoing investment. And they're not wrong! Frisco is still doing things. I'm just questioning whether those things justify a continued premium over cities that are also doing things, but aren't charging a brand tax for them.)
The Richardson Counter-Narrative
Here's what Richardson is doing while nobody's watching:
Silver Line transit access. Two stations—UT Dallas and CityLine/Bush—connecting the city to DFW Airport and the rest of the North Dallas corridor. This is live as of October 2025.
Major infrastructure reinvestment. Road and utility upgrades across the city. Not glamorous. Not making headlines. But the kind of capital spending that makes a city work better.
School bond investments. Facility upgrades, teacher retention initiatives, magnet program expansion. Richardson ISD isn't trying to out-grow Frisco ISD. It's trying to out-retain—keeping good teachers and improving existing campuses.
CityLine maturation. The State Farm campus, the Raytheon presence, the mixed-use density. CityLine is what happens when a suburb decides to build urban nodes instead of just more subdivisions.
None of this is sexy. Nobody's writing "Richardson: The Next Big Thing" articles. Which is exactly why there might be value here.
Want help applying this?
Sofee matches your priorities to the right suburb
Tell us what matters — commute, schools, budget, lifestyle — and we'll show you which North Dallas cities actually fit. No spam, no sales pitch. Just signal.
Take the quizThe Math That Most Buyers Don't Do
Let me try to make this concrete.
Scenario A: You buy in Frisco.
- •Median home price: ~$550K (depending on zip)
- •You're paying for established excellence
- •Your upside depends on Frisco continuing to outperform, which requires continued growth in a city that's running out of room to grow
Scenario B: You buy in Richardson.
- •Median home price: ~$425K (depending on zip)
- •You're paying for current value, not future promise
- •Your upside depends on the market recognizing what Richardson is becoming, which is a reinvestment story that's already funded and underway
One of these has more upside variance. It's not the one with the $125K brand premium baked in.
Now, I want to be careful here. Richardson isn't uniformly great. Some parts are aging in ways that aren't charming. Some school zones are stronger than others. The city doesn't have Frisco's curb appeal or Frisco's reputation. If you're buying to impress your relatives, Richardson won't do that.
But if you're buying to optimize for long-term appreciation potential with lower entry cost and less competition at offer time? Richardson deserves a harder look than it usually gets.
The Investor Lens vs. The Lifestyle Lens
I want to acknowledge something: not everyone is buying a house as an investment. Some people are buying a house because they want to live there, and they want to live in Frisco specifically, and no amount of math will change that.
That's fine! Preferences are real. If the vibe of Frisco appeals to you and you can afford it, buy in Frisco. You'll probably be happy.
But if you're treating your home purchase as a financial decision—which, given that it's probably the largest purchase you'll ever make, seems reasonable—then the question isn't "which city is best?" It's "which city is most underpriced relative to its trajectory?"
And right now, I think Richardson is more underpriced than Frisco. Not because Richardson is better. Because Frisco's price already reflects everyone knowing how good it is.
Who Should Consider Richardson
Buyers priced out of Frisco who think the only alternative is Prosper. Richardson is closer to everything, has comparable schools in many zones, and costs less. The tradeoff is older housing stock and less "new suburb" energy.
People who value transit. Silver Line access is real. If you fly frequently or want crosstown connectivity without driving, Richardson offers something Frisco doesn't.
Long-term holders. If you're buying for 10+ years and you believe that infrastructure reinvestment eventually shows up in prices (I do), Richardson's current cycle could work in your favor.
Anyone who hates bidding wars. Richardson listings don't get 47 offers in the first weekend. That's a feature, not a bug.
Who Should Ignore This Take
People who want the newest everything. Richardson's housing stock is older. Some of it is 1970s-1990s construction. If you want a 2023 build with smart home features and a three-car garage, Richardson won't work for you.
People whose social circle is Frisco-centric. If your kids' friends all live in Frisco and your weekend activities are all in Frisco, moving to Richardson means driving to Frisco all the time anyway. That defeats the purpose.
People who are certain Frisco will keep appreciating faster. Maybe it will! I don't know the future. If you think the Frisco premium is justified and growing, buy Frisco. This article isn't for you.
The Uncomfortable Truth
Here's what I actually believe: in 10 years, the gap between Frisco and Richardson will be smaller than it is today.
Not because Frisco will decline. Because Richardson will catch up. The reinvestment cycle, the transit access, the CityLine effect—these things compound. And right now, they're not fully reflected in Richardson prices the way Frisco's past growth is reflected in Frisco prices.
Following the crowd into Frisco isn't wrong. It's just not the only play anymore.
The question is whether you want to buy the consensus pick at consensus prices, or the contrarian pick at contrarian prices. Neither is objectively correct. It depends on what you're optimizing for.
The Bottom Line
Frisco is great. Richardson is underrated. Both of these things can be true at the same time.
If you're optimizing for safety and certainty, buy Frisco. You know what you're getting.
If you're optimizing for upside and value, take a hard look at Richardson. You might be early to a story the market hasn't fully priced in yet.
The boring city doing boring infrastructure work is often the one that surprises people in 10 years. I'm not saying Richardson will surprise everyone. I'm saying the conditions are there for it to happen.