This paper, taking Tangxiaxiaoqu, the Guangzhou’s biggest indemnificatory housing community, as an example, examines the characteristics, reasons and driving forces of residential mobility, according to the different types of households. It reaches the following conclusions. It has significant spatial disparity in original place of residence for different types of households. For the original residents of the community, the low-rent housing residents’ original place of residence is the farthest from the community, which is located in old city centre, and the degree of spatial agglomeration of them is the highest. Affordable housing residents’ original residential space is east-west long-span. For the new residents, their residential mobility distances are comparatively shorter. Most of ordinary rental households’ original residence places are from Tianhe district, they are the most spatially disperse. Those of second-hand housing households are comparatively spatially concentrated, while they are also from Tianhe District. There are also significant differences between types of households in residential mobility reasons. The main reasons of original households moved to the community are benefited from housing security policy, short on economic ability and housing demolition. It belongs to passive type of mobility, dominated by the government or units. While, the new households moved to the community because of closer location to the work place, transportation convenient, limitation on economic condition and so on, in consideration of personal and family factors primarily. It belongs to initiative type of mobility, dominated by market mechanism. Meanwhile, they have a strong desire to move out. Small living space, seeking better educational resources, improved economic conditions and the community management problems are the main reasons to drive residents to move out. It means that high rate of residential mobility and filtering will last in the future. The difference of reasons to move out between original households and the new is seeking better educational resources for children. Meanwhile, the residents who own property pay more attention to neighborhood quality. After ten years of continuous mobility, the community’s household composition has changed dramatically. It is evolving from indemnificatory housing community to ordinary one, featured with significant transition and mobility. Moreover, filtering phenomenon appears in it.