County housing + labor

When county housing measures and local jobs move apart

Which counties have Zillow rent and FHFA house-price measures moving in one direction while covered employment moves in the other?

This county screen keeps three different measures separate: Zillow asking-rent change, FHFA repeat-transaction appreciation and BLS QCEW covered-employment change. It isolates places where both housing signs agree with each other but oppose the local workplace signal.

Starting universe
1,011
counties with all three direct changes
Strict disagreements
325
both housing signs oppose covered jobs
Housing up / jobs down
308
rent and HPI positive, jobs negative
Jobs up / housing down
17
jobs positive, both housing signs negative
What the three-source join reveals

Housing pressure can persist while the workplace base contracts

The complete intersection contains 1,011 counties with direct Zillow rent change, FHFA appreciation and QCEW covered-employment change. Requiring both housing measures to share a sign while employment has the opposite sign leaves 325 counties. Of those, 308 have rising rent and HPI alongside falling covered employment; 17 show the reverse pattern.

Crawford County, AR has the largest employment decline in the first group at -7.4%, while Zillow rent changes 2.3% and FHFA HPI changes 4.6%. The opposite group is led by Caldwell County, TX, where covered employment changes 7.5% while rent and HPI change -2.3% and -2.4%, respectively.

Opposite signs do not identify the cause. They identify counties where a one-signal growth story deserves more scrutiny before a property reaches underwriting.

The releases are deliberately not synchronized or averaged. QCEW counts jobs at covered workplaces; it does not measure employed residents. FHFA is a repeat-transaction index rather than a dollar price, while Zillow rent is a broad asking-rent measure rather than a unit comp. The useful next step is to open the county page, inspect its wage, industry, supply and migration context, then verify property-level rent and costs.

Strict opposite-sign cases

Housing measures agree; local jobs point the other way

Dots retain three separate annual changes. Nothing is averaged into a score.

County rent, house-price and employment changes moving in opposite directionsDot plot of selected counties where Zillow rent and FHFA house-price changes share one sign while QCEW covered employment has the opposite sign.0%Crawford CountyZillow rent 2.3%FHFA HPI 4.6%QCEW employment -7.4%jobs -7.4%Jackson CountyZillow rent 2.8%FHFA HPI 3.9%QCEW employment -4.8%jobs -4.8%Lyon CountyZillow rent 7.6%FHFA HPI 0.7%QCEW employment -4.5%jobs -4.5%Georgetown CountyZillow rent 6.9%FHFA HPI 3.1%QCEW employment -4.4%jobs -4.4%Rockingham CountyZillow rent 7.3%FHFA HPI 6.5%QCEW employment -3.9%jobs -3.9%Jasper CountyZillow rent 4.8%FHFA HPI 3.7%QCEW employment -3.8%jobs -3.8%Polk CountyZillow rent 0.6%FHFA HPI 2.8%QCEW employment -3.5%jobs -3.5%Caldwell CountyZillow rent -2.3%FHFA HPI -2.4%QCEW employment 7.5%jobs 7.5%Rockwall CountyZillow rent -0.2%FHFA HPI -0.9%QCEW employment 5.2%jobs 5.2%Pasco CountyZillow rent -0.2%FHFA HPI -2.6%QCEW employment 3.5%jobs 3.5%Travis CountyZillow rent -2.0%FHFA HPI -1.7%QCEW employment 3.3%jobs 3.3%Collin CountyZillow rent -1.7%FHFA HPI -0.8%QCEW employment 3.0%jobs 3.0%Hays CountyZillow rent -2.5%FHFA HPI -0.1%QCEW employment 3.0%jobs 3.0%Williamson CountyZillow rent -1.3%FHFA HPI -1.0%QCEW employment 2.6%jobs 2.6%Annual change: cooling ← 0 → rising
The first group has both housing measures rising while covered jobs fall; the second has jobs rising while both housing measures fall. The chart shows the largest absolute employment changes in each group.
Decision table

The first 24 rows, with a path to the underlying market

325 total rows Download all rows
Largest covered-employment changes where both county housing measures have the opposite sign
RankCountyRent YoYFHFA HPIJobs YoYWeekly wageLargest private supersector
1Caldwell County, TXQCEW 2025-2.3%-2.4%7.5%$1,100Trade, transportation, and utilities26.4% of private covered jobs
2Crawford County, ARQCEW 20252.3%4.6%-7.4%$965Manufacturing29.7% of private covered jobs
3Rockwall County, TXQCEW 2025-0.2%-0.9%5.2%$1,148Trade, transportation, and utilities23.6% of private covered jobs
4Jackson County, GAQCEW 20252.8%3.9%-4.8%$1,033Trade, transportation, and utilities49.1% of private covered jobs
5Lyon County, KSQCEW 20257.6%0.7%-4.5%$951Manufacturing32.6% of private covered jobs
6Georgetown County, SCQCEW 20256.9%3.1%-4.4%$1,017Leisure and hospitality27.3% of private covered jobs
7Rockingham County, NCQCEW 20257.3%6.5%-3.9%$927Trade, transportation, and utilities26.6% of private covered jobs
8Jasper County, MOQCEW 20254.8%3.7%-3.8%$1,003Trade, transportation, and utilities30.8% of private covered jobs
9Pasco County, FLQCEW 2025-0.2%-2.6%3.5%$1,120Trade, transportation, and utilities25.2% of private covered jobs
10Polk County, ORQCEW 20250.6%2.8%-3.5%$1,044Education and health services26.6% of private covered jobs
11Whitfield County, GAQCEW 20253.4%2.7%-3.3%$1,089Manufacturing35.5% of private covered jobs
12Travis County, TXQCEW 2025-2.0%-1.7%3.3%$1,942Professional and business services26.5% of private covered jobs
13Hanover County, VAQCEW 20255.2%3.6%-3.2%$1,157Trade, transportation, and utilities32.2% of private covered jobs
14Warren County, VAQCEW 20251.8%4.6%-3.1%$1,059Trade, transportation, and utilities26.0% of private covered jobs
15Coffee County, TNQCEW 20251.8%3.5%-3.1%$1,149Manufacturing20.4% of private covered jobs
16Shenandoah County, VAQCEW 20251.2%2.8%-3.1%$984Trade, transportation, and utilities25.1% of private covered jobs
17Collin County, TXQCEW 2025-1.7%-0.8%3.0%$1,769Professional and business services22.2% of private covered jobs
18Hays County, TXQCEW 2025-2.5%-0.1%3.0%$1,091Trade, transportation, and utilities30.6% of private covered jobs
19Clark County, OHQCEW 20253.2%4.7%-2.9%$1,024Trade, transportation, and utilities23.5% of private covered jobs
20Frederick County, VAQCEW 20255.0%4.5%-2.8%$1,206Trade, transportation, and utilities32.5% of private covered jobs
21Howard County, INQCEW 20253.3%5.5%-2.7%$1,222Manufacturing28.1% of private covered jobs
22Navajo County, AZQCEW 20252.7%3.2%-2.6%$1,002Trade, transportation, and utilities25.6% of private covered jobs
23Walla Walla County, WAQCEW 20253.4%5.0%-2.6%$1,137Education and health services24.7% of private covered jobs
24Kanawha County, WVQCEW 20254.6%1.8%-2.6%$1,240Education and health services29.7% of private covered jobs

The visible table is intentionally limited for reading. The CSV contains every row that passes the printed inclusion rule.

Reproduce the screen

Inclusion first, interpretation second.

Start with current Census counties that have direct Zillow county rent change, FHFA annual HPI change and BLS QCEW annual employment change. Publish only strict opposite-sign cases: rent and HPI both above zero with employment below zero, or rent and HPI both below zero with employment above zero. Rank by absolute employment change.

Methodology version: v2

Method

  1. Zillow county rent change measures the current asking-rent index; FHFA annual HPI change measures repeat mortgage transactions.
  2. QCEW annual average covered employment is workplace-based and the change recomputes from the prior annual release.
  3. No average or composite is made from the three rates; signs determine inclusion and absolute job change determines order.

Counter-signals

  • Housing and labor releases cover different periods, so disagreement can reflect timing rather than a structural break.
  • Covered employment excludes some workers and counts jobs where establishments operate, not where workers live.
  • County-wide rent and HPI measures can conceal sharply different cities, property types and price bands.

Limitations

  • Only counties with all three direct series enter; absence from the table is not evidence that the signals agree.
  • FHFA HPI is an appreciation index rather than a dollar home price, and Zillow rent is not a unit-level comp.
  • The screen does not explain causation or forecast which signal will reverse; it identifies a due-diligence queue.
Move from market to deal

Use the study to narrow the question—not to skip underwriting.

Open a market for its supply, affordability, migration and risk context. Compare a deliberate substitute, then bring a real property price, rent and expenses into the stress test.