City limitsPlace boundary

Curated city comparison

NampaConcord

Cross-region growth-city peers of nearly equal population scale with material differences in yield, affordability, housing stock and local-demand evidence.

Nampa, ID city briefConcord, NC city brief

Decision memo

The trade-off before property underwriting

The interpretation uses direct city records only. County and metro averages are not substituted into this comparison.

Concord, NC better fits cash_flow and entry_affordability: its Zillow gross yield is 5.59% versus Nampa, ID at 4.66%, while its home-value index is $387,217.95 versus $418,846.91. Concord also has the lower price-to-income measure, 4.45 versus 5.64. Underwriting should verify achievable unit rent, taxes, insurance, vacancy and near-term capital needs before treating that gross spread as durable.

Renter_pressure depends on whether the priority is tenant depth or supply tightness. Concord has a 34.76% renter share and 51.69% rent burden, but its 10.37% vacancy rate signals more available housing. Nampa has fewer renters, yet its 3.44% vacancy rate and 3.46% Zillow rent growth indicate tighter conditions. Check property-level concessions, competing listings and turnover rather than inferring occupancy from citywide measures.

Nampa better fits housing_stock when the target is conventional detached inventory: its single-family share is 79.01%, and its median year built is 2000. Concord better fits local_demand on population and household economics, with population change of 18.20%, median household income of $86,921 and poverty of 9.62%. That conclusion is tempered by Concord’s higher unemployment and vacancy. Confirm employer exposure, neighborhood absorption and the subject property’s competitive set.

Direct city matrix

The same definition on both sides

“n/a” remains missing. Zillow indexes and ACS survey measures stay visibly separate.

Decision evidence	Nampa, ID	Concord, NC
Typical home valueZillow ZHVI · city	$418,847	$387,218
Observed market rentZillow ZORI · city	$1,626	$1,805
Gross yieldZORI × 12 ÷ ZHVI · before costs	4.7%	5.6%
Price to household incomeZillow value ÷ ACS income	5.64x	4.45x
Annual rent to incomeZillow rent × 12 ÷ ACS income	26.3%	24.9%
Rent burdenACS renter households paying 30%+	50.1%	51.7%
Renter shareACS occupied housing	29.8%	34.8%
Vacancy rateACS all housing units	3.4%	10.4%
Population changebetween ACS vintages · not annualized	▲ 17.4%	▲ 18.2%
UnemploymentACS civilian labor force	3.1%	5.5%

Entry and income screen

Price, rent and yield do not tell the same story

Bars begin at zero within each measure. Gross yield remains a before-cost screen.

Zillow city ZHVI and ZORI · 2026-06 / 2026-06

Price and rent history

Two city paths, each rebased to 100

Each panel keeps price and rent in its own city; no level is borrowed across geographies.

Five-year path

Price and rent, rebased to 100

ZHVI +3.1%ZORI +23.7%

Each series starts at 100 so their direction can be compared without pretending that a home value and a monthly rent share the same unit.

Five-year path

Price and rent, rebased to 100

ZHVI +27.1%ZORI +25.7%

Each series starts at 100 so their direction can be compared without pretending that a home value and a monthly rent share the same unit.

Fit by objective

There is no universal city winner

Five city questions remain separate so a yield lead cannot erase affordability or demand risk.

Cash-flow screenConcord

Concord, NC better fits cash_flow because its Zillow gross yield is 5.59%, compared with 4.66% in Nampa, ID, and its Zillow rent index is $1,805.02 versus $1,626.46. The advantage is only a screening signal: gross yield excludes every major operating and financing cost. For the next check, underwrite actual asking rent, concessions, vacancy, management, repairs, taxes, insurance, utilities and capital work for comparable properties in both cities.

Entry affordabilityConcord

Concord, NC better fits entry_affordability. Its Zillow home-value index is $387,217.95, below Nampa, ID at $418,846.91, while price to income is 4.45 versus 5.64. ACS median home value is a survey measure of occupied owner housing, not a competing appraisal, so it should not be blended with Zillow. Property-level underwriting should next compare acquisition price, condition, closing costs and required renovation within equivalent submarkets.

Renter pressureDepends on the property

Concord, NC shows broader renter exposure than Nampa, ID, with renter share at 34.76% versus 29.78% and rent burden at 51.69% versus 50.07%. Nampa, however, has a much lower vacancy rate, 3.44% versus 10.37%, and stronger Zillow rent growth. The fit therefore depends on whether the strategy values renter depth or tighter supply. Check current competing vacancies, concessions, lease-up time and turnover around each subject.

Housing stockNampa

Nampa, ID better fits housing_stock for a detached-home strategy: single-family housing represents 79.01% of stock, compared with 75.66% in Concord, NC. Nampa also has only 2.54% in large multifamily structures versus Concord’s 5.92%, and its median year built is 2000 versus 1998. That profile does not establish condition. Inspect roof, systems, deferred maintenance, layout and neighborhood-level competing supply before choosing a property.

Local demand riskConcord

Concord, NC better fits local_demand, though not without caution. Its overlapping-vintage ACS population change is 18.20%, compared with 17.42% in Nampa, ID, and median household income is $86,921 versus $74,279. Concord’s poverty rate is lower, but its unemployment rate is higher. Verify major-employer concentration, commute patterns, tenant inquiry volume and neighborhood absorption; the population changes are not annualized and should not be projected as yearly growth.

Household pressure

Acquisition and renter affordability

Zillow city indexes divided by direct ACS city household measures.

Housing system

Tenure, vacancy and structure

ACS citywide housing characteristics; not rentable inventory or lease-up speed.

Underwriting boundary

What this city comparison cannot decide

City evidence narrows a search; it does not appraise, inspect or finance a property.

01
Zillow indexes describe city-level market movement, while ACS rent, value and housing measures are survey estimates answering different questions. They should not be averaged, and neither establishes the achievable rent, condition-adjusted value or acquisition price of a specific property.
02
The reported gross yields exclude vacancy, management, repairs, taxes, insurance, utilities, financing and capital work. Concord, NC therefore cannot be assumed to deliver better net cash flow than Nampa, ID until identical property-level operating assumptions and renovation scopes are tested.
03
ACS population change compares overlapping vintages and is not annualized. Citywide vacancy, renter share, unemployment and poverty can also conceal sharp neighborhood differences, so demand conclusions require current submarket listings, concessions, lease-up evidence, employer exposure and tenant-screening results.

Figure-level provenance

The direct sources behind both records

Release period and retrieval date remain separate. Open either city brief for its complete geography ledger.

Census ACS 5-year — city population, households and housingACS 2024 5-yearPulled 2026-07-29 Census ACS 5-year — cities and communitiesACS 2024 5-yearPulled 2026-07-30 Zillow ZHVI — city home valueszillow_zhvi_city.csvPulled 2026-07-29 Zillow ZORI — city market rentszillow_zori_city.csvPulled 2026-07-29

Nampa, IDOpen the complete city brief110,319 residents in the current ACS record Concord, NCOpen the complete city brief108,719 residents in the current ACS record Property testStress-test the same assumptionsReplace city averages with an actual deal