FIPS 48453 · population 1,330,015 · part of Austin, TX
The latest county-level Zillow ZORI is $1,649 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.
| Bedrooms | HUD monthly FMR | Geography | Measurement boundary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Studio | $1,474 | Travis County, TX | HUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent. |
| 1 bedroom | $1,562 | Travis County, TX | HUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent. |
| 2 bedrooms | $1,852 | Travis County, TX | HUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent. |
| 3 bedrooms | $2,347 | Travis County, TX | HUD administrative benchmark; compare with same-bedroom listings, never treat it as observed asking rent. |
| 4 bedrooms | $2,760 | Travis County, TX | HUD 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
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 estimates a current home value. FHFA tracks repeat mortgage transactions. Their growth rates should be read side by side, not averaged.
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.
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.
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.
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%.
These Apartment List observations match the exact county Census code 48453. They are kept separate from Zillow asking rent, Census occupied-home rent and wider metro measures.
Monthly overall-rent index; missing observations are not filled from another geography.
Travis County has a clear underwriting tension: Zillow's 2026-06 median home value is $476,400, down 5.13%, while median asking rent is $1,649, down 2.01%. Gross yield is 4.15% before costs. That invites entry-price investigation, but cash-flow buyers should be cautious because rent has not held while price fell. FHFA's repeat-transaction HPI is a check, not a home value: its 2025 change was down 1.70%, versus a cumulative five-year gain of 31.54%. The vintages and methods differ, so do not combine them with Zillow.
Measured market rent is distinct from HUD's two-bedroom FMR: $1,852 is a payment standard, not an asking-rent estimate, and the market-rent-to-FMR ratio is 89%. The stated yield therefore uses market rent, not FMR. An effective property-tax rate of 1.48% and median annual tax of $7,727 add carrying-cost pressure. A net yield cannot be computed because property-level assessment, vacancy, insurance, repairs, management, financing and other operating costs are not supplied.
Demand evidence is mixed. The supplied QCEW record shows annual covered employment growing 3.27% and average weekly wages growing 4.92%. Those are workplace covered-job and covered-worker measures, not resident employment or unemployment; Professional and business services is the largest disclosed private supersector, not the whole economy. Net migration was +872, but the average-income AGI gap was -$4,251 for incoming versus outgoing movers. That positive count alongside a negative income balance supports checking submarket tenant depth rather than assuming broad demand. Investor mortgages were 9.79% of 14,196 purchases. This establishes participation, not buyer demand, and does not show whether investors are crowding out occupants.
Risk diligence is central. The modeled annual building-value loss ratio is 0.12%, but inland flood is the dominant hazard; that model is not a parcel flood determination, repair budget or insurance quote. Realtor.com listing-market fields are not published, so asking-price positioning, visible supply, marketing time, seller concessions and pending-to-active conditions cannot be assessed; those fields would not be closed-sale proof anyway. Before underwriting, obtain parcel flood-zone and elevation data, insurance terms, property-level taxes and expenses, lease comps, condition, and closed-sale comps. Until then, this is an entry-price investigation with a thin pre-cost yield, not a validated cash-flow case.
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.
Within the 12 selected direct-evidence ZIP/ZCTA matches assigned to Travis County, Zillow’s June 2026 ZORI—a typical observed asking-rent index—ranges from $1,253 to $1,864. The selected-set median is $1,480 and the spread is $611, a material variation for a renter comparing locations in this set. The decision is therefore not simply which label has the lowest index: it is whether the current asking-rent position, unit configuration, and lease terms fit a renter’s budget while the other evidence streams signal different historical or administrative reference points. Because the displayed Zillow values share one rent period, this range is a relative-positioning tool within the selected evidence set, not a quote for a particular advertised unit.
Those streams answer different questions and should be read side by side, not combined. HUD’s two-bedroom FMR is $1,852 in every displayed record; it is an administrative bedroom-specific standard rather than an asking rent. The selected Zillow-to-HUD relationship ranges from 67.7% to 100.6%, with 78753 at the low end and 78704 slightly above the benchmark. Separately, ACS five-year ZCTA median gross rents range from $1,502 to $1,863. Gross rent is an ACS five-year survey estimate, not a direct, time-matched test of a current Zillow asking-rent index. A ratio below the standard neither determines a household payment nor establishes program eligibility.
Affordability pressure does not track the current ZORI ordering cleanly in this selected set. ACS’s share of renter households paying 30% or more of income for rent spans 37.0% in 78704 to 65.0% in 78705, compared with 48.5% countywide. The same ACS survey reports vacancy from 4.0% in 78660 to 10.9% in 78705, versus 5.6% for Travis County. A renter weighing a lower asking-rent index against these signals should treat burden as a household-outcome measure and vacancy as a stock measure, not proof that a particular unit is affordable, available, or will lease at a particular price.
The figures cover 12 of 38 eligible direct-ZORI ZIP/ZCTA matches and 167,597 renter households under the selection rule, so they are a focused evidence set rather than an exhaustive county inventory. ZCTAs are statistical areas, not USPS delivery ZIPs; ZIPs can cross county lines, and this display assigns each to the county holding the largest HUD residential-address share. Before using any ZIP-level comparison, confirm the property address, bedroom count, live asking rent, concessions, lease length, utilities, availability, and any eligibility conditions at the property level. Use current written terms rather than relying on any ZIP-level figure alone.
38 ZIP profiles passed the county gate; the 12 with the most renter households are shown.
| ZIP / ZCTA | Zillow asking rent | ACS gross rent | HUD 2BR | Burden 30%+ | Vacancy | Income screen | HUD county share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 78741 | $1,435 | $1,596 | $1,852 | 47.9% | 8.0% | $57k | 100.0% |
| 78758 | $1,578 | $1,663 | $1,852 | 47.2% | 5.6% | $63k | 100.0% |
| 78704 | $1,864 | $1,801 | $1,852 | 37.0% | 6.9% | $75k | 100.0% |
| 78753 | $1,253 | $1,502 | $1,852 | 55.5% | 4.3% | $50k | 100.0% |
| 78745 | $1,517 | $1,713 | $1,852 | 44.2% | 4.8% | $61k | 100.0% |
| 78660 → | $1,679 | $1,863 | $1,852 | 47.9% | 4.0% | $67k | 99.4% |
| 78759 | $1,433 | $1,727 | $1,852 | 43.0% | 6.2% | $57k | 97.4% |
| 78748 | $1,411 | $1,839 | $1,852 | 45.5% | 4.5% | $56k | 100.0% |
| 78705 | $1,846 | $1,571 | $1,852 | 65.0% | 10.9% | $74k | 100.0% |
| 78744 | $1,443 | $1,647 | $1,852 | 49.7% | 4.1% | $58k | 100.0% |
| 78728 | $1,295 | $1,632 | $1,852 | 50.9% | 6.8% | $52k | 77.7% |
| 78752 | $1,518 | $1,581 | $1,852 | 49.3% | 5.5% | $61k | 100.0% |
Open a five-digit report for asking rent, affordability, rent history and resale liquidity. Each row keeps its ZIP/ZCTA measurement scope.
| ZIP report | City label | Zillow rent | 1Y change | ACS burden 30%+ | Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZIP 78702 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $2,051 | ▼ 0.8% | 48.6% | 25,985 |
| ZIP 78704 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,864 | ▼ 1.4% | 37.0% | 50,688 |
| ZIP 78723 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,851 | ▲ 0.2% | 44.7% | 38,129 |
| ZIP 78757 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,851 | ▲ 5.1% | 41.9% | 23,856 |
| ZIP 78705 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,846 | ▲ 0.6% | 65.0% | 33,238 |
| ZIP 78660 rental reportTravis County | Pflugerville, TX | $1,679 | ▼ 2.4% | 47.9% | 124,834 |
| ZIP 78758 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,578 | ▼ 1.4% | 47.2% | 49,617 |
| ZIP 78752 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,518 | ▼ 3.9% | 49.3% | 23,317 |
| ZIP 78745 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,517 | ▼ 1.8% | 44.2% | 61,219 |
| ZIP 78727 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,514 | ▼ 2.0% | 36.1% | 29,958 |
| ZIP 78744 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,443 | ▲ 1.0% | 49.7% | 50,986 |
| ZIP 78741 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,435 | ▼ 2.7% | 47.9% | 45,951 |
| ZIP 78759 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,433 | ▼ 4.9% | 43.0% | 43,182 |
| ZIP 78748 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,411 | ▼ 4.2% | 45.5% | 55,631 |
| ZIP 78753 rental reportTravis County | Austin, TX | $1,253 | ▼ 7.8% | 55.5% | 56,920 |
Zillow ZORI is an asking-rent index. ACS burden and population describe the Census ZCTA; missing observations remain n/a.
Census-recognized incorporated places and CDPs that intersect this county. The list does not pretend to include every neighborhood or informal community.
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.
0.121% of building value expected lost per year
$7,727 median annual bill
56,045 in · 55,173 out
$99,618 arriving · $103,869 leaving
1,390 of 14,196 mortgages
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.
| County | Population | Price | Rent | Yield | Hazard |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Travis County | 1,330,015 | $476k | $1,649 | 4.2% | inland flooding |
| Williamson County | 672,688 | $405k | $1,685 | 5.0% | inland flooding |
| Hays County | 268,638 | $373k | $1,571 | 5.1% | inland flooding |
| Bastrop County | 106,582 | $361k | $1,831 | 6.1% | inland flooding |
| Caldwell County | 48,669 | $288k | $1,663 | 6.9% | inland flooding |
The published median monthly asking rent anchors it; HUD's two-bedroom FMR is a payment standard, not market rent.
QCEW measures annual average covered jobs located in the county and the covered-worker average weekly wage; it is not resident employment or unemployment. Professional and business services is the largest disclosed private supersector, not the whole economy.
Parcel-level flood-zone and elevation data, insurance terms, property condition and full expenses are missing. Realtor.com listing-market fields are also not published, so visible supply, marketing time and seller concessions cannot be assessed.