Gloversville, NY

Gloversville, NY presents a market-level decision record with broad direct coverage but a decisive rent-history gap. The geography has a population of 52,487, and the packet combines Zillow asking-rent and home-value indexes, Census ACS income, HUD Fair Market Rent, BLS labor data, Census Building Permits Survey supply, Redfin sale-market measures, FEMA risk evidence, IRS migration, and HMDA mortgage occupancy evidence. These sources describe different portions of the market rather than a single performance measure. Zillow does not publish enough history here to calculate the trailing-12-month rent change: it is unavailable. Under the stated rule, Gloversville is unranked, receives no score, and is not assigned a rank. The core issue is therefore not comparative standing, but whether the current rent, value, affordability, supply, demand, and hazard readings remain consistent once their different scopes are separated.

At 2026-06-30, Zillow reports a home-value reading of $229,455, with a year-over-year change of 7.3%. Its asking-rent reading is $1,088 and the supplied gross yield is 5.69%. This is a current valuation-to-asking-rent snapshot: a higher home-value reading is observed alongside a stated rent level and yield. It is not a rental trend record. The 7.3% Zillow home-value change cannot substitute for the missing Zillow trailing-12-month rent change, because value movement and asking-rent movement are distinct measures. Nor does the current asking-rent figure establish whether asking rents accelerated, stabilized, or declined before 2026-06-30. For any rent-sensitive decision, the tension is straightforward: Zillow provides a directly observed level but not the history required to evaluate its recent direction.

The Census ACS median household income figure is $66,533. The supplied rent-to-income ratio is 0.1961, while the price-to-income ratio is 3.45; these are useful standardized affordability boundaries, not evidence about every renter or buyer. HUD's FY2026 two-bedroom Fair Market Rent is $1,087, only $1 below Zillow's $1,088 asking-rent reading. That numerical proximity deserves careful interpretation rather than automatic equivalence. HUD Fair Market Rent is a two-bedroom program benchmark, while Zillow reports an asking-rent index, and neither measure identifies an achieved lease rent in a particular unit. Census ACS income is likewise a market-level household-income statistic, not a measure of tenant income. Together, Census ACS and HUD indicate that the current published rent level sits very near the available two-bedroom benchmark, but they do not resolve how rents vary across unit types or lease conditions.

Labor and supply evidence adds another scope distinction. BLS LAUS reports metro job growth of 0.38% over the 12 months through 2026-05. The Census Building Permits Survey reports 50 permits during 2026 year-to-date through M06, or 0.95 permits per 1,000 population. It records zero permits in the 5+ unit category and a 0% share for that category. Redfin, measured on 2026-05-01, reports 3.8 months of for-sale supply, unchanged from the prior 3.8 months. Its median days on market moved to 22 from 25, sale-to-list was 0.9751, and the price-drop share was 0.2951 versus 0.3597 previously, a 0.0646 decrease in the share. The apparent tension is not contradictory: Census Building Permits measures newly permitted supply, while Redfin measures a for-sale market snapshot. Neither source, by itself, measures rental vacancy or completed rental inventory.

IRS and HMDA provide direct but narrower demand and participation evidence. IRS county-to-county tax-return migration aggregated to the market reports 1,172 moved in and 1,133 moved out, for net migration of 39. Reported AGI in is $57,421 and AGI out is $57,166, a supplied gap of $255. HMDA's 2024 purchase-mortgage occupancy evidence records 486 purchases, of which 56 were investor purchases, producing an investor share of 11.52%. The IRS figures document a small positive net flow in the reported migration data, while HMDA documents investor participation within its purchase-mortgage record. They should not be merged into a claim about lease demand, household formation, or the full ownership market. IRS migration and HMDA purchase mortgages cover different populations and decision points, and HMDA does not describe purchases outside its mortgage-occupancy evidence.

FEMA introduces a separate risk boundary. FEMA's National Risk Index identifies inland flood as the top hazard, classified here as water risk. The supplied climate-loss ratio is 0.001218 and the National Risk Index score is 48.6. Those are risk indicators, not quoted insurance, repair, mitigation, or operating costs. The cost-level evidence available in this packet is limited to Zillow's $229,455 home-value reading and $1,088 asking-rent reading, plus HUD's $1,087 two-bedroom Fair Market Rent. No insurance-premium, loss-history, rebuilding-cost, or hazard-mitigation expense is supplied. Accordingly, FEMA's readings can identify inland flood as a market-level issue requiring separate documentation, but the packet does not translate the risk metrics into a cost burden or show how that burden is reflected in the Zillow, HUD, Redfin, or HMDA measures.

Read together, the evidence supports a practical due-diligence synthesis rather than a directional verdict. Zillow establishes current value and asking-rent levels but lacks the rent history needed for a score or rank. Census ACS and HUD place that rent reading beside income and a two-bedroom benchmark, while BLS, Census Building Permits, and Redfin describe labor, permitted supply, and for-sale conditions on distinct terms. IRS and HMDA show limited migration and mortgage-investor evidence without establishing rental demand, and FEMA identifies inland flood without supplying cost conversion. The unresolved questions are therefore whether observed asking rents resemble available lease terms, whether permitted units become completed rental supply, whether the small IRS net migration and HMDA investor share persist outside their source scopes, and what documented inland-flood costs accompany the FEMA measures. No market-wide rent forecast, property conclusion, neighborhood conclusion, or investment ranking follows from the packet.