Montgomery County, TN

Montgomery County presents a valuation-versus-income tension. Zillow’s county median home value was $322,951 at its 2026-06 observation, down 0.21% year over year, while FHFA’s repeat-transaction HPI rose 3.66% in 2025. These measures have different vintages and methods and cannot be blended; FHFA is an appreciation index, not a home value. Investors needing current valuation support should investigate local closed-sale comparables, while those relying on immediate price confirmation should be cautious.

Measured median asking rent was $1,375 per month, and the supplied gross yield was 5.11% before costs. That supports an initial income screen, not a net-cash-flow conclusion. The effective property-tax rate was 0.61%, a carrying-cost input that requires property-specific assessment review. HUD’s two-bedroom FMR of $1,346 is a payment standard rather than market asking rent and was not used to derive yield. Missing insurance, maintenance, vacancy, financing, utility, and management-cost evidence prevents NOI, debt-service, and after-tax cash-flow underwriting.

County demand support is present but qualified. QCEW annual covered employment at county workplaces rose, and the average covered-worker wage increased 6.19%; this is neither resident employment nor an unemployment measure or forecast. Trade, transportation, and utilities was the largest disclosed private supersector. Net migration was 1,832 tax-return households, but inbound movers’ average AGI was $953 lower than outbound movers’, limiting a simple affluent-mover reading. The 6.94% investor share sits against 4,354 total purchases. Realtor.com MLS evidence indicates more active listings and longer marketing time, while 19.02% of listings had price reductions: visible supply and seller concessions, not closed-sale pricing or stand-alone proof of buyer demand.

Modeled annual climate loss equals 0.15% of building value, and inland flood is the named dominant hazard. That county-level model cannot identify an individual parcel’s flood exposure, insurance cost, mitigation needs, or claims history. Next checks are address-level flood maps and insurance quotes, lease and vacancy comparables by submarket, recent closed sales, and assessed-tax records. Those checks determine whether the apparent gross-yield screen survives actual operating costs and location-specific risk.