Counties / Washington / Pierce County

Pierce County, WA

FIPS 53053 · population 930,319 · part of Seattle, WA

$573k
Zillow home value · 2026-06
Direct county rent answer

What does rent cost in Pierce County, WA?

The latest county-level Zillow ZORI is $1,962 per month in 2026-06. It is a typical asking-rent index across rental types—not an arithmetic average, signed lease or quote for one property.

County Zillow ZORI$1,9622026-06 · up 2.2% year over year
County ACS gross rent$1,806ACS 2024 5-year · occupied-renter survey
HUD two-bedroom FMR$1,971FY2026 · administrative standard
HUD Fair Market Rent by bedroom count in Pierce County
BedroomsHUD monthly FMRGeographyMeasurement boundary
Studio$1,428Pierce County, WAHUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent.
1 bedroom$1,605Pierce County, WAHUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent.
2 bedrooms$1,971Pierce County, WAHUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent.
3 bedrooms$2,733Pierce County, WAHUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent.
4 bedrooms$3,102Pierce County, WAHUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent.

Zillow asking rent, ACS gross rent and HUD FMR describe different housing universes. They remain separate and no metro, city or neighboring-county value replaces missing county evidence.Zillow pulled 2026-07-26 · HUD pulled 2026-07-26

The numbers

What this county costs and earns

Everything here joins on the county FIPS code, so each figure comes from the agency that publishes it with no name matching in between.

Zillow home value
$573k
▼ 0.1% year over year
Zillow ZHVI · direct
Median asking rent
$1,962
▲ 2.2% year over year
Zillow ZORI · direct
Gross yield
4.1%
annual rent ÷ price, before costs
derived: rent × 12 ÷ price ✓
HUD 2-bed standard
$1,971
market rent is 0.99x the standard
HUD Fair Market Rent · direct
Independent price check

Do two methods point the same way?

Zillow estimates a current home value. FHFA tracks repeat mortgage transactions. Their growth rates should be read side by side, not averaged.

The annual signals disagree
FHFA five-year cumulative+45.6%not annualized · through 2025
0%ZILLOW ZHVI2026-06−0.1%FHFA HPI2025+2.9%
Annual changes use different methods and may use different periods. The comparison checks direction and magnitude; it does not create a blended estimate. Zillow county ZHVI pulled 2026-07-26; FHFA annual county HPI pulled 2026-08-02.
Owner-reported value$527k
Surveyed gross rent$1,806
Rent burden 30%+53.0%
Median year built1986
Housing composition

Who occupies the stock—and what it is

ACS 2024 5-year
5.0%vacant
369,709estimated housing units
Occupied tenure35.3% renter
owner 64.7%renter 35.3%
Structure mix70.4% single-family
Single-family 70.4%20+ units 8.1%Mobile home 4.5%Other 17.0%
ACS estimates describe the standing housing stock and occupied tenure. They do not measure current listings, transaction prices or asking rents.

Survey source: Census ACS 5-year — county housing value, tenure and stock · ACS 2024 5-year · pulled 2026-07-30. These values describe different housing universes and are not combined into gross yield.

Annual average covered jobs337,125▲ 1.1% from the prior annual release
Covered establishments21,348annual average reporting locations
Average weekly wage$1,423▲ 5.1% from the prior annual release
Largest private supersectorTrade, transportation, and utilities26.0% of disclosed private covered jobs
Local labor base

Jobs, pay and private-sector concentration

2025
0%COVERED JOBS+1.1%WEEKLY WAGE+5.1%Trade, transportation, and utilities26.0%
Annual QCEW counts cover jobs located at reporting establishments. The industry share uses disclosed private covered employment; it is not a resident-employment measure or a forecast.

Workplace source: BLS QCEW — county employment and wages · annual county employment and wages 2021-2025; latest 2025 vs 2024 · pulled 2026-08-02. QCEW counts covered jobs located in the county, not employed residents or the metro score’s CES/LAUS series.

Resident income

How local income has compounded

BEA per-capita personal income divides all personal income by the county population. It is broader than wages, but it is not household income or a measure of what renters can afford.

Per-capita personal income19692024
Per-capita personal income history for Pierce CountyA line chart of annual BEA per-capita personal income from 1969 through 2024.$0k$35k$70k196919972024$4k$68k
Nominal annual dollars; not adjusted for inflation. A rising line can reflect wage, business-income, transfer-income and investment-income changes together.
Renter affordability

Who carries the heaviest rent burden

HUD CHAS separates renter households by income relative to local HAMFI. Moderate burden means housing costs above 30% through 50% of income; severe burden means more than 50%.

Share of renter households in each income band2018-2022
Renter cost burden by HAMFI income band in Pierce CountyFive horizontal bars show moderate and severe housing cost burden shares among renter households in each HUD income band.0%25%50%75%100%At or below 30% HAMFI20,82079.4% burdened30–50% HAMFI18,57084.8% burdened50–80% HAMFI30,54063.2% burdened80–100% HAMFI14,96527.3% burdenedAbove 100% HAMFI36,2455.1% burdened
Moderate: >30% to 50%Severe: >50%
Each percentage uses HUD’s published subtotal for that income band. For disclosure, HUD keeps 0 as 0, publishes 1–7 households as 4 and rounds 8 or more to the nearest 5. Independently rounded categories can differ from their displayed sum and are not forced into a percentage.
Direct local rental evidence

Recent leases and rental-market liquidity in Pierce County, WA

These Apartment List observations match the exact county Census code 53053. They are kept separate from Zillow asking rent, Census occupied-home rent and wider metro measures.

Direct recent-lease rent history

Monthly overall-rent index; missing observations are not filled from another geography.

$1,781$1,725$1,6692021-082026-07
Recent-lease rent$1,7492026-07 · -1.1% year over year
Rental vacancy5.8%2026-07 · -0.5 percentage points year over year
Time on market30 days2026-07 · +2.0 days year over year
County brief

What the local evidence says

01Decision frame

Pierce County’s tension is a rent-supported but price-ambiguous entry point: it warrants property-level review for investors who can underwrite carrying costs, and caution for buyers depending on prompt appreciation. Zillow’s county median home value was $573,349, down 0.13% year over year, whereas FHFA’s separately labeled annual repeat-transaction HPI rose 2.89%. The HPI is an index rather than a home value; different methods and observation periods prevent combining these readings into one growth rate.

02Housing economics

Measured median asking rent was $1,962 per month and stated gross yield was 4.11%, before expenses. HUD’s $1,971 two-bedroom Fair Market Rent is a payment standard, not an asking-rent estimate, and should not replace the measured market rent. The effective property-tax rate was 0.91%, with median annual tax of $4,770; together with the price-to-rent relationship, that makes expense verification central. The record does not publish insurance, maintenance, vacancy, utility, financing, or property-level assessment costs, preventing net-yield and debt-service conclusions.

03Demand & competition

Realtor.com’s MLS listing-market evidence shows visible softening rather than completed-sale evidence: active listings rose 15.69% year over year and 23.07% of listings had reductions. Tax-return migration was net positive by 1,150 households, while average income of incoming moving households exceeded outgoing households by $2,992. Investor mortgages accounted for 6.27% of purchase mortgages. This mix provides demand and competition context, but it does not demonstrate absorption, tenant demand, or investor bidding intensity at a target property.

04Risk & next checks

QCEW annual covered workplace employment rose 1.09%; Trade, transportation, and utilities was the largest disclosed private supersector, at 26.00% of total private covered jobs. These are workplace-based covered-employment measures, not resident jobs, unemployment, or a forecast. Earthquake is the dominant hazard, and modeled climate loss equals 0.23% of building value annually; that model does not establish actual insurance cost or damage at an address. Obtain earthquake coverage, deductibles, retrofit and construction records, lease rolls, operating statements, closed-sale comps, and financing terms before relying on the county thesis.

County ZIP rental landscape

How asking rent and renter pressure vary inside Pierce County, WA

This view uses 12 direct Zillow ZIP markets matched to Census ZCTAs. Each ZIP is assigned by its largest HUD residential county share; this is not an exhaustive county inventory.

Selected ZIP range$1,537$2,487Zillow asking-rent index
Monthly spread$950highest minus lowest selected ZIP
Observed burden range43.3%63.9%ACS renter households paying 30%+
Renter households covered65,094across the selected ZCTAs
01 · ASKING RENT LADDERDirect ZIP ZORI
Horizontal bars compare Zillow asking-rent indexes across the selected direct-evidence ZIP set.98374$2,48798406$2,19398404$2,16398372$2,10498466$1,97798373$1,96598498$1,77498402$1,75798499$1,67698409$1,64198405$1,56098444$1,537
02 · PRESSURE MATRIXRent × observed burden
Each point is one selected ZIP and ZCTA match. Horizontal position is Zillow asking rent and vertical position is the ACS renter cost-burden share.66.4%60.0%53.6%47.2%40.8%984999844498409984059846698373983749837298498984069840498402Zillow asking-rent index →ACS burden share →
03 · BENCHMARK GAPZORI vs HUD 2BR
Bars show the percentage difference between the Zillow blended asking-rent index and the local HUD two-bedroom standard. Their housing universes differ.98374+99.4%98406+87.7%98404+86.5%98372+84.1%98466+79.0%98373+78.6%98498+70.9%98402+70.3%98499+67.0%98409+65.6%98405+62.4%98444+61.5%
WHAT THE LOCAL DISTRIBUTION SAYS

Across the selected direct-evidence ZIP/ZCTA matches in Pierce County, Zillow’s June 2026 ZORI—a typical observed asking-rent index—ranges from $1,537 to $2,487. That is a $950 spread around a $1,869.50 median, enough to make local price positioning, rather than a single county figure, the central rental decision. The county’s ZORI is $1,962, with a 2.16% annual change, but the selected set shows that a county reference can obscure materially different asking-rent levels. The practical question is which current listings fit a household’s required unit size, budget, and lease terms, while recognizing that ZORI describes an index rather than the price of any specific vacant unit.

Within the selected set, ZIP 98444 anchors the low end at $1,537 and recorded 2.25% annual ZORI growth, while ZIP 98374 anchors the high end at $2,487 and grew 1.82%. ZIP 98498 posted the fastest change, 7.32%, whereas ZIP 98405 declined 1.46%. These movements identify differing recent index paths, not predictions or explanations. Renters comparing options should prioritize the current rent band first and use the change rate only as a secondary signal to recheck listing availability and renewal terms. Nothing in these figures establishes why a ZIP differs from another or whether its change will persist.

Do not merge the three rent measures. For this displayed ZIP set, HUD’s FY2026 two-bedroom FMR is $2,501, compared with the county counterpart of $1,971; it is an administrative payment standard, not an asking-rent estimate. The Zillow-to-local-HUD ratios span 61.5% to 99.4%, a useful standard comparison but not a discount calculation. Separately, ACS ZCTA five-year survey median gross rents range from $1,473 to $2,061, reflecting a distinct survey measure that is not contemporaneous ZORI. ACS rent-burden shares range from 43.3% to 63.9%, while vacancy rates span 2.5% to 8.2%. Lower cost or lower burden should not be read independently of this separate survey availability signal; neither metric assures a suitable current listing. Use ZORI for observed asking-rent conditions, ACS for survey context, and HUD for the bedroom-specific program standard.

Coverage and geography require restraint. The report shows 12 ZIP/ZCTA matches from 33 eligible direct-ZORI matches, covering 65,094 renter households; it is not a complete county or neighborhood inventory. Every displayed ZIP is assigned to Pierce County using the largest HUD residential-address share, which is 100% here, yet ZIPs can cross county lines and Census ZCTAs are statistical areas rather than USPS delivery ZIPs. Before selecting a unit, confirm the exact address and county assignment, bedroom count, advertised rent, included utilities, lease length, deposit and recurring fees, available date, concessions, income rules, and screening criteria. Those property-level terms determine the actual offer and cannot be supplied by the index, survey estimates, or HUD standard.

Selected ZIP evidence

Keep each source universe visible

33 ZIP profiles passed the county gate; the 12 with the most renter households are shown.

ZIP / ZCTAZillow asking rentACS gross rentHUD 2BRBurden 30%+VacancyIncome screenHUD county share
98499$1,676$1,473$2,50149.4%6.4%$67k100.0%
98444$1,537$1,647$2,50163.9%7.2%$61k100.0%
98409$1,641$1,645$2,50152.7%3.7%$66k100.0%
98405$1,560$1,551$2,50154.9%4.9%$62k100.0%
98466$1,977$1,843$2,50152.7%3.1%$79k100.0%
98373$1,965$1,929$2,50148.9%2.5%$79k100.0%
98374$2,487$2,061$2,50150.6%3.5%$99k100.0%
98372$2,104$1,783$2,50143.8%3.4%$84k100.0%
98498$1,774$1,711$2,50143.3%8.2%$71k100.0%
98406$2,193$1,764$2,50153.9%3.4%$88k100.0%
98404$2,163$1,483$2,50156.3%4.1%$87k100.0%
98402$1,757$1,553$2,50149.4%7.6%$70k100.0%
READ BEFORE USING

Zillow ZORI is a typical observed asking-rent index, whereas ACS ZCTA figures are five-year survey estimates and HUD FMR is an administrative bedroom-specific standard. Their timing, population, construction, and intended use differ, so they should not be averaged, substituted, or treated as identical measures.

Displayed ZIPs are assigned through the largest HUD residential-address county share, but ZIPs may cross county lines and Census ZCTAs do not equal USPS delivery ZIPs. The selected direct-evidence set is not exhaustive, and no conclusion should be extended to unshown areas or individual properties.

SOURCE LEDGERCensus ACS 5-year — county housing value, tenure and stockACS 2024 5-year · pulled 2026-07-30Census ACS five-year — ZCTA housing and incomeACS 2024 5-year ZCTA · pulled 2026-08-08HUD Fair Market Rents — Section 8 standardFY2026 FMR · pulled 2026-07-26HUD-USPS ZIP-to-county residential-address crosswalkHUD-USPS 2026Q1 · pulled 2026-08-09Zillow ZHVI and ZORI — county values and rentscounty ZHVI/ZORI 2026-06 · pulled 2026-07-26Zillow ZORI — ZIP market rentsZORI ZIP 2026-06 · pulled 2026-08-08
Cities & communities

Where people live within Pierce County

Census-recognized incorporated places and CDPs that intersect this county. The list does not pretend to include every neighborhood or informal community.

Population scale

Largest Census places

ACS 2024 5-year
Tacoma city222.8KAuburn city*85.7KSouth Hill CDP68KLakewood city62.9KPuyallup city42.7KParkland CDP38.7KGraham CDP35.1KUniversity Place city34.9K
Bars use total place population, not a county-share estimate. An asterisk marks a place that crosses a county line.
Official directory

75 Census places

Population
  1. 01
    Tacoma cityIncorporated place
    222,758
  2. 02
    Auburn cityIncorporated place · spans 2 counties
    85,676
  3. 03
    South Hill CDPCensus-designated place
    68,025
  4. 04
    Lakewood cityIncorporated place
    62,937
  5. 05
    Puyallup cityIncorporated place
    42,746
  6. 06
    Parkland CDPCensus-designated place
    38,742
  7. 07
    Graham CDPCensus-designated place
    35,079
  8. 08
    University Place cityIncorporated place
    34,911
  9. 09
    Spanaway CDPCensus-designated place
    34,019
  10. 10
    Frederickson CDPCensus-designated place
    25,383
  11. 11
    Bonney Lake cityIncorporated place
    22,090
  12. 12
    Fort Lewis CDPCensus-designated place
    15,167
Show 63 more places
  1. 13
    Elk Plain CDPCensus-designated place
    14,276
  2. 14
    Artondale CDPCensus-designated place
    14,073
  3. 15
    Edgewood cityIncorporated place
    13,032
  4. 16
    Enumclaw cityIncorporated place · spans 2 counties
    12,798
  5. 17
    Lake Tapps CDPCensus-designated place
    12,798
  6. 18
    Gig Harbor cityIncorporated place
    12,424
  7. 19
    Prairie Ridge CDPCensus-designated place
    12,074
  8. 20
    Fife cityIncorporated place
    10,949
  9. 21
    Sumner cityIncorporated place
    10,733
  10. 22
    DuPont cityIncorporated place
    9,931
  11. 23
    Tehaleh CDPCensus-designated place
    9,561
  12. 24
    Midland CDPCensus-designated place
    9,050
  13. 25
    Orting cityIncorporated place
    8,978
  14. 26
    Milton cityIncorporated place · spans 2 counties
    8,894
  15. 27
    Summit CDPCensus-designated place
    8,791
  16. 28
    Summit View CDPCensus-designated place
    8,480
  17. 29
    Waller CDPCensus-designated place
    7,683
  18. 30
    Clover Creek CDPCensus-designated place
    7,345
  19. 31
    Fircrest cityIncorporated place
    7,069
  20. 32
    Pacific cityIncorporated place · spans 2 counties
    7,066
  21. 33
    Wollochet CDPCensus-designated place
    6,689
  22. 34
    Steilacoom townIncorporated place
    6,686
  23. 35
    North Fort Lewis CDPCensus-designated place
    6,337
  24. 36
    Maplewood CDPCensus-designated place
    5,803
  25. 37
    Buckley cityIncorporated place
    5,371
  26. 38
    Prairie Heights CDPCensus-designated place
    4,998
  27. 39
    Wauna CDPCensus-designated place
    4,805
  28. 40
    Longbranch CDPCensus-designated place
    4,638
  29. 41
    Rosedale CDPCensus-designated place
    4,208
  30. 42
    Key Center CDPCensus-designated place
    3,544
  31. 43
    Fox Island CDPCensus-designated place
    3,414
  32. 44
    McChord AFB CDPCensus-designated place
    2,999
  33. 45
    Canterwood CDPCensus-designated place
    2,971
  34. 46
    Eatonville townIncorporated place
    2,850
  35. 47
    Alderton CDPCensus-designated place
    2,706
  36. 48
    South Creek CDPCensus-designated place
    2,191
  37. 49
    Stansberry Lake CDPCensus-designated place
    1,807
  38. 50
    Home CDPCensus-designated place
    1,665
  39. 51
    North Puyallup CDPCensus-designated place
    1,653
  40. 52
    Anderson Island CDPCensus-designated place
    1,448
  41. 53
    Fife Heights CDPCensus-designated place
    1,446
  42. 54
    McMillin CDPCensus-designated place
    1,348
  43. 55
    Purdy CDPCensus-designated place
    1,344
  44. 56
    Clear Lake CDP (Pierce County)Census place
    1,271
  45. 57
    Crocker CDPCensus-designated place
    1,254
  46. 58
    Ruston cityIncorporated place
    1,245
  47. 59
    Browns Point CDPCensus-designated place
    979
  48. 60
    Dash Point CDPCensus-designated place
    889
  49. 61
    Vaughn CDPCensus-designated place
    753
  50. 62
    Roy cityIncorporated place
    735
  51. 63
    Carbonado townIncorporated place
    704
  52. 64
    McKenna CDPCensus-designated place
    669
  53. 65
    Wilkeson townIncorporated place
    552
  54. 66
    Kapowsin CDPCensus-designated place
    466
  55. 67
    Raft Island CDPCensus-designated place
    333
  56. 68
    Ashford CDPCensus-designated place
    319
  57. 69
    South Prairie townIncorporated place
    309
  58. 70
    La Grande CDPCensus-designated place
    288
  59. 71
    Herron Island CDPCensus-designated place
    119
  60. 72
    Alder CDPCensus-designated place
    96
  61. 73
    Greenwater CDPCensus-designated place
    59
  62. 74
    Elbe CDPCensus-designated place
    0
  63. 75
    Ketron Island CDPCensus-designated place
    0

Population is the total place-wide ACS estimate, not an allocated county share. A place crossing a county line is labelled explicitly. Source: Census ACS 5-year — cities and communities · ACS 2024 5-year · pulled 2026-07-30.

Risk, demand and competition

The three things a price does not tell you

01
Risk & carrying costFEMA NRI + Census ACS
Dominant hazardearthquake

0.227% of building value expected lost per year

Effective property tax0.91%

$4,770 median annual bill

02
DemandIRS SOI household flows
Net migration+1,150

28,102 in · 26,952 out

Arriving vs leaving income+$2,992

$73,728 arriving · $70,736 leaving

03
CompetitionHMDA financed purchases
Purchases by investors6.3%

672 of 10,724 mortgages

investorother financed
Current listing pressure

What sellers and visible supply are doing

Realtor.com® Economic Research · county inventory 2026-06 · pulled 2026-07-28
Active listings2,592▲ 15.7% year over year
Median days on market40▲ 11.1% year over year
Listings price-reduced23.1%seller-concession signal
Median listing pricen/a▼ 0.4% year over year

Listing price is an asking price, not a closed sale. Quality-flagged county rows are withheld instead of displayed.

Same metro

The other counties in Seattle, WA

A metro is an average of these. Which side of a county line a property sits on can change the tax bill, the hazard profile and the tenant pool.

CountyPopulationPriceRentYieldHazard
Pierce County930,319$573k$1,9624.1%earthquake
King County2,287,171$858k$2,3303.3%earthquake
Snohomish County844,430$754k$2,2323.5%earthquake
Bear case

What can break the county thesis

  1. Property-level expenses or financing could turn the stated gross yield into insufficient net cash flow.
  2. Migration and covered-workplace employment evidence may not translate into tenant demand within a specific submarket.
  3. Earthquake insurance availability, deductibles, or building vulnerability may exceed underwriting assumptions.
Underwriting questions

Before pricing a property

Is a market rent available for gross-yield underwriting?

Yes. Median asking rent is $1,962 per month and stated gross yield is 4.11% before costs; HUD two-bedroom FMR is a separate $1,971 payment standard.

Do the price sources establish one appreciation rate?

No. Zillow shows a 0.13% county-value decline, while FHFA reports a 2.89% annual HPI increase; their methods and observation periods differ.

What risk should be checked at the address level?

Earthquake is the dominant hazard; modeled climate loss is 0.23% of building value annually, but address-level insurance and vulnerability are not published.