Not in the Bay Area, this is article from 2020 and even then $384k got you only in the top 10%. $105k was basically median.

Source: https://amp.thecalifornian.com/amp/4625295002

The national percentile doesn’t really matter when your income is not portable, and you can’t just move and take it with you.

As another post said, it’s doable on $135k but it’s not easy in the SF Bay Area.

> The national percentile doesn’t really matter when your income is not portable, and you can’t just move and take it with you.

With remote work, it's a lot more portable than you might think.

For some, yes. Unfortunately, this is not as evenly available as one might hope or even as widely as it was used during pandemic.

In any given city the number of homes for sale is a small percentage of the population, and even then most of those homes will trade between incumbent owners. Prospective first time buyers are competing over the number of new housing units & units freed by out-migration, downsizing, and death. People are living longer. Boomers are aging in place. It’s pretty ordinary that would-be buyers outnumber these units more than 99:1. So merely being in the top 1% of prospective buyers is necessary, not sufficient. And since prices have gone up recently, prospective buyers are higher income than the city as a whole.