Saturday, October 31, 2026

Lisbon’s Short-Term Rentals: Occupancy Plummets, But Some Signs of Recovery

ViaNews Editorial Team

November 6, 2020

Lisbon, Portugal (Photo by WeSetupYourWebViewApp on Unsplash)

The tidal wave of travel cancellations that came along with the coronavirus pandemic upended usual accommodation patterns and put heavy pressure on occupancy levels across the world.

Portugal was no exception, with its always-bustling capital now much quieter than usual and a large number of its hotel rooms and vacation rentals remaining dormant.   

Exclusive statistics on the status of the short-term property market provided to Via News show that Lisbon has seen a large drop in occupancy, and while the industry is in better shape than it was early in the pandemic, it is still in crisis.

The year started well, with occupancy rates in Lisbon close to or almost the same as the previous year. In January 2020, the registered temporary lodging accommodations sit at 40%, compared to 43% in the same period last year.

The average occupancy rate of short-term rental properties in Lisbon, Portugal in 2019 and 2020.. Image credit: Via News. Source: Turismo de Portugal.

In February, the short-term rentals were at 47% average occupancy, just as they were in 2019. However, border closures and national restrictions to curb the spread of the respiratory disease began to take a toll on the hospitality sector in March.

The occupancy rate of Airbnb-style rentals in Lisbon in March fell from 61% in 2019 to 29%, ushering in a period of fear and uncertainty for property owners.

Things went downhill further in April when the Portuguese government rolled out a strict lockdown to combat the COVID-19 outbreak, which shut most non-essential services and restricted travel and movement. Only 6% of the listed short-term accommodations were occupied, compared to 63% in April last year.

The situation remained almost unchanged in the following month, with an occupancy rate of 9% compared to 72% in May 2019.

Read more: COVID-19 Stifles Supply of New Short-Term Rental Listings in Portugal

Slight Improvement in Demand

The occupancy data began to show a slight recovery in June, July, August, and September after Portuguese authorities announced a sector-by-sector plan in late April to gradually lift quarantine measures.

The occupancy rates of 13%, 29%, 44%, and 25% were registered in June, July, August, and September, respectively. This is while short-stay rentals were at 73%, 79%, 88%, and 79%, respectively, in the corresponding months of 2019.

Indeed, the rates are gradually recuperating, but there is no denying the fact that the sector is still in the grip of uncertain demand expectations heading into winter.

The average occupancy rate of short-term rental properties in Lisbon, Portugal in 2019 and 2020.. Image credit: Via News. Source: Turismo de Portugal.

The unclear prospects for the holiday accommodation market are fueled by the Portuguese government’s recent decision to introduce and implement a new set of restrictions due to a resurgence of contagion.

Portugal has so far recorded a comparatively low 161,350 infections and 2,740 deaths, according to the figures published by the Johns Hopkins University on November 6.

The situation is particularly better than in hard-hit neighboring Spain where 1,306,316 people have been infected and 38,486 have died of the novel virus.

However, Portugal had to gear up for a new battle after it recorded more than 1,000 new coronavirus cases in a single day on October 8 for the first time since April.

Ongoing Contest

As the industry struggles to recover, the never-ending competition between hotels and short-term rentals finds both trying to persuade travelers that their rooms are virus-free, their offerings are social-distancing compliant, and their terms and conditions are fair.

Read more: Short-Term Rentals Outperforming Hotels in Pandemic Era

According to a recent piece on the New York Times, “social distancing, hygiene, and refund policies may be the new game changers.”

Regardless of who wins this battle, it is hoped that the ultimate winner will be Portugal’s vital tourism sector, which has offered a tremendous contribution to the national economy throughout the years.

ViaNews Editorial Team

Via News Editorial Team delivers comprehensive financial news coverage and market analysis from journalists around the world. Our team specializes in data journalism and in-depth reporting on stock markets, business developments, and economic trends.

What we know · the intelligence behind this page
Live from the substrate
What we're seeing
ESMO 2026 Oncology Catalyst Cluster: Ivonescimab's PDUFA Date and Small-Cap Biotech Delistings
ESMO 2026 (Oct 22-24) concentrates a wave of oncology readouts. Summit's ivonescimab (10 presentations, positive HARMONi-GI1 OS, new EA2251 Phase II/III with ECOG-ACRIN) leads, ahead of its FDA PDUFA date of 2026-11-14, and Daiichi Sankyo's DXd ADC platform (REJOICE-Ovarian, DESTINY-Lung04, TUXEDO-3) follows. At the other end of the capital-markets spectrum, micro-cap Spago Nanomedical is moving to delist from Nasdaq First North (board resolution Oct 22, EGM Nov 19, application Jan 2027). Pivotal data and regulatory milestones are rewarding well-funded late-stage players, while cash-constrained early-stage developers are exiting public markets.
Our read on the data ›
Signals we're tracking
EPKINLY Regulatory-Clinical Success Cascade
High probability of expanded label indications, additional combination approvals, and competitive positioning strength in follicular lymphoma market. Predicts positive commercial uptake and potential accelerated review for related indications.
Patterns we're watching ›
Where sources disagree
Ford Motor Company
Both facts give cash for Ford Motor Company at the same point in time (2025-12-31; FY 2025 year-end and Q4 2025 year-end are the same date). Both are labelled USD, but the values are 23,356,000,000 and 23.356, which cannot both be true in USD. The two numbers agree once the second is read as billions (23.356 bn = 23,356,000,000), so the economic content is consistent and the conflict is a unit/scale error in the Q4 2025 record. The period is not the reason for the conflict: a Q4 and an FY figure at the same year-end date should match.
We flag conflicts openly ›
Recently verified
✓ Checked against the original source
4,995
facts traced to their source — and we flag the ones that don't hold up.
101 entities tracked4,995 facts checked against source5,525 source documents archived
Query this data → isubstrate.com