Garfield County presents a price-momentum versus income-validation tension. Zillow’s 2026-06 county home-value reading is $249,404, up 12.38%, while FHFA’s separately labeled annual 2025 repeat-transaction index rose 5.66% and was 51.54% higher over five years. These are directional but non-interchangeable: FHFA is not a dollar home value, and the distinct observations should not be averaged. Income-dependent underwriting merits caution until lease-level evidence is obtained.
No county market asking rent is published, so gross yield cannot be computed. HUD’s two-bedroom FMR of $1,047 per month is a payment standard, not an estimate of asking rent, and cannot fill that gap. The effective property-tax rate is 0.66%, alongside a $1,574 median annual tax; both require parcel-level validation against assessed value and actual tax bills.
Demand evidence is mixed and thin. QCEW’s 2025 annual average counts 643 covered jobs at county workplaces, down 1.38%, even as the covered-worker average weekly wage rose 1.96% to $1,194. Trade, transportation, and utilities accounts for 114 covered jobs as the largest disclosed private supersector, not the whole economy. Net tax-return migration was six households, but inbound mover AGI was $248 below outbound. Investors represented 7.14% of purchase mortgages, a limited participation signal rather than proof of buyer competition.
Risk limits are material because the dominant hazard is inland flood and modeled climate loss equals 0.30% of building value per year; this model does not replace parcel flood-zone, elevation, insurance, or deductible review. No Realtor.com MLS listing price, active-listing count, days on market, or price-reduced share is published, preventing a visible-supply or seller-concession read. Next checks are market leases, insurance quotes, flood history, tax bills, and sale comparables; county data cannot establish a specific asset’s cash flow or buyer demand.