SF landlords require 40x monthly rent in annual income but most tech workers have equity-heavy comp that does not count

A $3,500/month 1BR in SOMA requires you to prove $140,000/year in income (40x rent). You are a senior engineer making $180K base + $150K/year in RSUs. Your total comp is $330K but the landlord only counts your $180K base salary because stock vesting is not guaranteed income. Your offer letter shows $330K but the landlord wants pay stubs showing $15K/month gross, not $27.5K. Your pay stubs show $15K. The landlord says your income is insufficient for a $3,500 apartment despite you earning $330K. So what? Tech workers earning $250-400K in total comp are getting rejected from apartments because 40-60% of their compensation is in equity that landlords refuse to count. They end up in worse apartments than they can afford, or they pay 6-12 months upfront (tying up $21-42K in cash) to compensate for the income gap. Meanwhile the landlord rents to someone with a higher base salary but lower total comp. Why does this persist in the first place? Landlords use income verification services (Plaid, Snappt) that pull bank deposits and pay stubs. RSU vesting shows up as irregular large deposits that look like one-time events, not income. No verification service reliably classifies RSU income as recurring. Landlords are risk-averse — they would rather have a tenant with steady $160K salary than one with $120K salary + $200K in stock that could crash.