With ever-increasing home prices and stagnant wages, the dream of owning a home could be out of reach for many Americans, according to a new report.

Median home prices increased by 121% nationwide between 1960 and 2017, but median household income only went up 29%, according to a report by Clever Real Estate.

The median gross rent, on the other hand, increased by 72%, more than twice the growth seen by adjusted incomes, making renting costlier than ever and saving for a future home difficult.

But if you head to the Midwest, all is not lost. There you can purchase a house with little financial struggle at least in the near future. The South might have a few offerings, too, but not for long, the report said.

The report used census data from 1960 to 2017 on home prices, rents and household income to determine how the cost and affordability of housing changed over time. All measures were adjusted for 2017 inflation.

What makes the Midwest affordable is its low price-to-income ratio, defined as the median home price divided by the median household income in an area, according to the report. It’s a gauge of how long it will take homebuyers to save for a down payment, and whether they’ll be able to afford their monthly mortgage payments.

A healthy price-to-income ratio is 2.6, the report noted, adding that the nationwide price-to-income ratio hasn’t been healthy since the late 1990s.

But in the Midwest the overall price-to-income is 2.9 compared with an average a ratio of 4.2 across the other three regions, the report said. For example, the price-to-income ratio for the region's three major metropolitan areas are 2.8 for St. Louis, and 2.7 for Des Moines and Cincinnati, in line with other healthy housing markets.

For example, in St. Louis, the median home price in 1960 adjusted for 2017 inflation was $113,988, whereas in 2017, the median home price was $172,200.

Only 16 out of the 100 most populated cities in the United States are below a 2.6 price-to-income ratio in 2019, the report noted. Topping the list are Toledo, Ohio, at 2.14, Scranton, Pa., at 2.15, Dayton, Ohio, at 2.26, Syracuse, N.Y., at 2.28, Wichita, Kan. and Pittsburgh both are at 2.34.

The most expensive cities include San Jose, Calif., at a price-to-income ratio of 9.6, Los Angeles at 8.83, San Francisco at 8.79, Honolulu at 8.07 and San Diego at 7.3.

The price-to-income ratio in the West, the least affordable region, jumped to 4.9 from 2.1 in 1960. And while median home prices rose by 195%, median household income only increased by 26 percent, which means the growth rate of home prices is 7.5 times more than the growth rate of household income, the report said.

San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle and Denver all had a price-to-income ratio below 2.6 in the 1960s. But from the 1980s on, the ratio for San Francisco and Los Angeles climbed to 4.7 and 5.6, respectively, reaching its peak before the 2008 financial crisis at 9.2 and 8.8.

In Los Angeles, the growth rate of median household income since 1960 has been slower than the national average, the report noted, yet the growth rate of median home prices more than quadrupled, with a growth of 358%.

San Francisco is one of the few metro areas that almost doubled its median household income since 1960 with a growth rate of 91%. The city’s boom has led to an increase in high-demand, high-paying jobs. However, home prices increased 531% since 1960, reserving homeownership for the hyper-rich, despite the financial growth of the metro, the report said.

For example, the median home price in 1960 adjusted for 2017 inflation was $134,713, whereas in 2017, the median home price was $849,500.

With its growth rate of home prices 4.2 times more than the growth rate of household income, the Northeast is the second least affordable region, the report said.

In the 1960s, owning a house was affordable with a price-to-income ratio of 2.1. But that rose to 3.7 by 1990 when home values started to outscale household income in the 1980s. The price-to-income ratio reached its peak around the 2008 financial crisis at 4.6 and dropped to 4.0 in 2017, the report said.

The decrease over the few years, however, does not seem to fit the trend in all coastal metros. In Boston, home prices increased by 24% between 2010 and 2017, after dropping by 25% during the financial crisis, and median home prices increased 228% since 1960.

The South has some of the nation's most affordable housing, according to the report. Compared to the West and Northeast regions, the gap between home prices and household income is not as wide. The price-to-income ratios were around 2.6 between 1960 and 2000, but prices jumped during the 2000s and kept diong so through the housing crisis.

In 2000, the growth rate differences between home prices and household income were 17%, 13% and 23% for Charlotte, Columbia and Oklahoma City, respectively. By 2017, however, the same growth rate differences increased to 66%, 56%, and 82%, but household income couldn’t keep up, causing these metro areas to be less affordable relative to prior years, the report said.

Still, in 2017 the South's price-to-income ratios were not much higher than the healthy housing market average of 2.6. They were 3.2, 3.0, 2.9 and 2.8 for Charlotte, Birmingham, Columbia, and Oklahoma City, respectively.