Jasper, IN

Jasper, IN's statistical-area market is a level-data decision, not a momentum call. Its reported population is 43614, and the record contains direct observations on rent, values, incomes, labor, permits, listings, migration, mortgage purchases, and climate risk. Yet Zillow does not publish a trailing-12-month rent change for this market. The 12-month rent change is therefore unavailable, and this report does not assign a score or rank. That constraint matters because a current asking-rent level, even beside a current home-value level, cannot establish a rent trajectory. The useful question is narrower: whether the separately timed indicators identify issues that a renter, landlord, or small investor should test before relying on a single favorable or unfavorable signal.

At 2026-06-30, Zillow's asking-rent index is 1267 and its home-value index is 249774. Zillow reports a year-over-year home-value change of 0.0708 and a gross yield of 0.0609. These are current rent/value economics, but their scopes remain distinct: Zillow supplies asking-rent and home-value indexes, rather than a record of a given lease or sale. The provided price-to-income measure is 3.29, while the rent-to-income measure is 0.2001. Taken together, the level metrics permit a comparison of current price, rent, and income relationships; they do not show whether asking rents have risen, fallen, or held steady over the absent trailing period. A value-index increase and a stated yield are likewise not evidence of rent growth or of a market-wide transaction outcome.

Census ACS puts median household income at 75979, furnishing the income side of the two Zillow ratios. HUD's FY2026 two-bedroom Fair Market Rent is 956, whereas Zillow's asking-rent index is 1267; the supplied rent-versus-FMR measure is 1.325 and the arithmetic difference is 311. This is an affordability boundary, not a claim that the two series describe the same unit: Census ACS measures household income, HUD specifies a two-bedroom Fair Market Rent, and Zillow reports an asking-rent index. The gap highlights a benchmark mismatch worth examining by bedroom and lease context. It cannot determine a household's burden, eligibility, or actual rent without information absent from the packet, including the relevant unit mix and observed contracts.

Supply and market-speed evidence is notably mixed. BLS LAUS reports metro labor change of -0.0058 over the 12 months to 2026-05. Separately, the Census Building Permits Survey records 164 permits in 2026 YTD through M06, 0.0 in its separately reported permits_5p field, and 3.76 permits per 1K residents. Permits denote new permitted housing supply, not a completed or occupied stock count. Redfin's 2026-05-01 market reading shows 2.0 months of supply against 1.8 previously, while median days on market is 8.0 against 16.0 previously. Its sale-to-list measure is 0.9758, and the price-drop share is 0.3636 against 0.2651, an increase of 0.0985. More supply and more price reductions sit beside shorter reported market time. Since BLS, Census Building Permits, and Redfin operate on different measures and periods, this tension resists a simple demand-or-supply verdict.

IRS county-to-county tax-return migration, aggregated to the market, records 792 movers in and 873 movers out, for net migration of -81. The reported adjusted gross income of inbound filers is 53676, compared with 52709 for outbound filers, producing the supplied gap of 967. Thus, the migration count is negative even as the reported inbound AGI level exceeds the outbound level. That composition contrast is descriptive, not proof of local income change or housing demand. HMDA provides a different lens: its 2024 purchase-mortgage occupancy evidence shows 293 total purchases, 16 investor purchases, and an investor share of 0.0546. HMDA and IRS do not cover the same activity, period, or population. The data establish a measured investor presence within HMDA purchases, but cannot establish the role of investors in all market transactions or in rent setting.

FEMA's National Risk Index adds a risk screen that the rent and sales measures cannot answer. The expected annual loss ratio is 0.00133, the National Risk Index score is 59.1, and the designated top hazard is inland flood, a water hazard. Those are market-level risk signals, not evidence about exposure, damage history, insurance terms, or mitigation at any particular address. The packet contains no insurance premium, tax, repair, utility, or operating-expense series. Its available cost-level anchors are Zillow's asking-rent and home-value indexes and HUD's Fair Market Rent, which are rent/value benchmarks rather than a full occupancy or ownership cost ledger. Consequently, FEMA evidence calls for a separate exposure-and-cost review instead of being folded mechanically into the gross-yield figure.

The practical synthesis is an investigation sequence, not a directional market call. Start with the missing Zillow rent history: determine whether an appropriate trailing rent series exists for the desired unit context before treating 1267 or the 0.0609 gross yield as a trend signal. Reconcile the Census ACS income and HUD two-bedroom benchmark with unit characteristics and actual lease terms, rather than equating indexes. Then separate permits from completions and occupancy, reconcile the BLS labor reading with its coverage, and inspect Redfin's inventory, market time, and reduction measures on their own dates. For demand, distinguish the IRS tax-return migration record from HMDA purchase-mortgage evidence. For risk, establish the relevant FEMA flood exposure and unavailable cost items. This preserves the important contradictions--negative net migration, higher inbound AGI, negative labor change, recorded permits, higher listed supply, shorter market time, and more price reductions--without converting them into a forecast, score, or rank.