I live in a place that has received awards as a retirement destination, IE: we have people in the scenario you describe... I don't really see a difference in these outcomes in terms of inventory. One observation I'd make is that many people who stay in their homes to the end often don't have the means (money, health, etc) to maintain their homes, meaning those homes are often in worse shape and thus a lower valuation. Often too if you think of a "last home" it is either going to be a "downsize" or it's a "dream home" neither of which may be appropriate for all segments of the market. This segmentation is something that gets overlooked when we talk about supply side problems. I have lots of houses available in my market, but they may not be the square footage or condition that all buyers are willing to accept.

Renting is not a new option, and it is not trivial. Is there a reason to assume a higher rate of inheritors to rent rather than sell?