States / California

State rental intelligence

California rental market data

A source-traced view across 32 metro markets and 58 counties. State figures below are labelled medians and totals—not a made-up statewide investment score.

32/32 metros scored58/58 counties with FEMA risk13 sources used in this analysis

Median scored metro44.5out of 100 · 32 measured metros

California identity diorama showing regional landscape, cities, housing, and infrastructure

Median metro home value$556kmedian across published metro values

Median metro rent$2,373monthly · published metro values

Median gross yield4.7%annual rent ÷ price · before costs

Median job trend▲ 0.7%trailing 12-month metro employment

State research brief

A 3.2-percentage-point rent-over-price growth gap creates California's clearest screen, but net out-migration and heavy renter burdens weaken any broad pricing-power thesis.

Updated 2026-07-31 · evidence current to the releases listed below.

Across 32 measured metros, asking rents rose 2.7% at the median while home values fell 0.5%, producing a 3.2-percentage-point gap. The 10th-to-90th percentile range was 1.0% to 7.9% for rent growth and -2.3% to 2.8% for value growth. That supports screening for local rent-to-price improvement rather than relying on broad appreciation.

The counter-signals are material. California recorded net migration of -100,509 across all 58 counties even as median metro job growth remained positive at 0.7%. Median gross yield was 4.7% across measured metros, while the median county had 54.8% of renters spending at least 30% of income on rent. Coverage also varies: county rents were available for 48 of 58 counties, county rent growth for 44, county listings for 53 and metro resale conditions for 30. The packet therefore supports local screening, not a statewide return conclusion.

Median metro rent growth of 2.7% versus home-value growth of -0.5% → prioritize markets where achievable rent is improving relative to acquisition price.

Median job growth of 0.7% alongside net migration of -100,509 → require local household and leasing evidence rather than treating employment growth as sufficient demand confirmation.

Median gross yield of 4.7% and median metro rent-to-income of 32.1% → stress tenant affordability and collections before accepting the headline yield.

Median resale supply of 3.3 months with a 26.6% price-drop share → distinguish negotiation opportunities from genuinely weak local liquidity.

Median county renter burden of 54.8% with vacancy ranging widely across counties → verify rent-ready vacancy and property-level competition separately.

Price and rent momentum

Rent growth cleared value growth across the measured metro distribution

Among the 32 measured metros, median home-value growth was -0.5% and median asking-rent growth was 2.7%. The supplied difference was 3.2 percentage points in favor of rents. Home-value growth ranged from -2.3% at the 10th percentile to 2.8% at the 90th, while rent growth ranged from 1.0% to 7.9%. The main screen is therefore whether a property's achievable rent is improving relative to its acquisition price, not whether all California values are rising.

The relationship still differs by market. El Centro recorded 6.5% value growth and 9.3% rent growth, with a 5.5% gross yield. San Francisco was more sharply separated: values rose 0.1% while rents rose 8.2%, a calculated gap of 8.0 percentage points, but its gross yield was only 3.5%. Faster rent growth can improve the rent-to-price relationship without producing a high starting yield.

Evidence: Zillow ZHVI — metro home values · Zillow ZORI — metro market rents

Employment and household movement

Positive job growth conflicts with statewide household outflow

Job growth across 32 measured metros had a positive median of 0.7%, but the 10th-to-90th percentile range ran from -0.6% to 2.1%. Merced recorded 3.5% job growth and Yuba City 2.1%, showing that some measured labor markets were stronger than the statewide metro midpoint.

Migration points the other way. Across all 58 counties, 736,699 people moved in and 837,208 moved out, for net migration of -100,509, or -2.56 per 1,000 residents. Aggregate income associated with movers had a positive $313,517 inflow-outflow balance, so the income and headcount measures did not move together. Because the migration and employment releases cover different periods and jobs are not households, neither measure establishes current rental demand in a specific neighborhood.

Evidence: Census ACS 5-year — population · BLS CES — payroll employment · BLS LAUS — resident employment · IRS SOI — county migration and mover income

Entry cost and affordability

Higher headline yields come with meaningful income pressure

Measured metro gross yields had a median of 4.7% and a 10th-to-90th percentile range of 3.7% to 5.9%. Median rent absorbed 32.1% of median household income, with a range of 27.7% to 36.6%, while the median price-to-income ratio was 6.57. The median measured-rent-to-HUD-Fair-Market-Rent ratio was 1.09. Together, these figures show that a stronger headline yield can coincide with limited tenant affordability.

Among the packet's highlighted yield markets, Hanford had a 6.5% gross yield and 33.5% rent-to-income ratio; Clearlake had a 6.4% yield and 33.0% rent-to-income ratio; and Visalia had a 6.0% yield and 30.7% rent-to-income ratio. Those yields are gross: they do not include vacancy, maintenance, insurance, property tax, financing or management. Screening should stress both achievable rent and operating costs rather than treating the yield as a return estimate.

Evidence: Census ACS 5-year — household income · HUD Fair Market Rents — Section 8 standard · Zillow ZHVI — metro home values · Zillow ZORI — metro market rents

Supply and resale conditions

Short median resale supply masks distinctly slower pockets

Across 30 metros with resale data, median supply was 3.3 months and median marketing time was 34.5 days. The 90th percentiles reached 5.9 months and 47.2 days. The median price-drop share was 26.6%, while the median sale-to-list ratio was 99.2%. These figures indicate that price reductions were common even though the midpoint did not show prolonged inventory.

The slow-market examples were much looser. Clearlake had 8.2 months of supply, 91 days on market and a 96.6% sale-to-list ratio; Ukiah had 8.6 months, 56 days and a 97.8% ratio. A construction counter-signal appears in Hanford, where permits reached 7.4 units per 1,000 residents while resale supply was 2.0 months and marketing time was 24 days. Permits identify a pipeline, not completed rental competition, and slower resale conditions do not by themselves establish tenant demand.

Evidence: Census Building Permits Survey — permitted units · Redfin Data Center — inventory, days on market, and price cuts

Housing stock and tenant conditions

Heavy renter burdens coexist with very different vacancy profiles

Across 58 counties, the median total housing vacancy rate was 10.1%, with a wide 5.0% to 31.2% 10th-to-90th percentile range. The median renter share was 37.2%, and 74.4% of housing units were single-family at the median. The median share of renters spending at least 30% of income on rent was 54.8%, ranging from 44.3% to 59.3% between the 10th and 90th percentiles.

High burden did not map to one vacancy pattern. Lake County had a 61.9% renter-burden share and 21.7% total vacancy; Solano County had 60.2% burden but only 4.4% vacancy; Humboldt County had 60.1% burden and 12.7% vacancy. The ACS vacancy measure covers total housing and should not be read as rent-ready availability. Likewise, high rent burden indicates tenant pressure but does not prove room for rent increases or the ability to collect them.

Evidence: Census ACS 5-year — county housing value, tenure and stock

Physical risk and property tax

County hazard and tax screens can materially change the gross-yield picture

The mutually exclusive FEMA leading-hazard labels cover all 58 counties: inland flood leads in 42, earthquake in 12 and wildfire in four. The median county climate-loss ratio was 0.34%, and the 90th percentile was 0.48%. Trinity County measured 0.75%, Sierra County 0.75% and Lake County 0.63%, placing the highlighted loss ratios above that 90th-percentile level.

The median effective property-tax rate was 0.70%, with a 90th percentile of 0.77%. Kern County measured 0.88% with a $2,984 median tax bill, Placer County 0.85% with $5,812, and Contra Costa County 0.83% with $7,156. These county measures belong in expense screening, but neither a county loss ratio nor its single leading-hazard label establishes insurance cost or exposure for an individual parcel.

Evidence: FEMA National Risk Index — hazard loss ratios · Census ACS 5-year — effective property tax

Evidence selected for California

The ranges behind the analysis

Each row keeps its own unit and shows the measured 10th percentile, median and 90th percentile. A single-value row is labelled directly.

Price and rent momentumAre home values and asking rents moving together or separating?

Employment and household movementDo jobs, household movement and mover income point in the same direction?

Entry cost and affordabilityHow far do local prices, rents, incomes and HUD rent standards stretch?

Shape of the state

Distribution before conclusion

A statewide median can hide a wide spread. These SVG charts render at build time and carry no chart library or browser-side data request.

Metro score distribution32 scored metros · median 44.5

County evidence coverageEvery gap stays visible as missing—not estimated

Highest measured metro gross yieldsscreening metric only · before expenses and financing

Metro leaderboard

Markets touching California

Multi-state CBSAs appear in every member state. Score is still a metro score; no value is reweighted into a statewide ranking.

#	Metro	Score	Price	Rent	Yield	Jobs
1	Gardnerville Ranchos, NV	66	$709k	$2,618	4.4%	▲ 4.7%
2	San Jose, CA	64	$1584k	$3,729	2.8%	▲ 1.4%
3	Salinas, CA	62	$855k	$2,906	4.1%	▲ 1.4%
4	Redding, CA	60	$377k	$1,650	5.3%	▲ 2.1%
5	El Centro, CA	56	$381k	$1,756	5.5%	▲ 0.9%
6	Sonora, CA	56	$396k	$1,472	4.5%	▼ 0.1%
7	Yuba City, CA	55	$434k	$2,011	5.6%	▲ 2.1%
8	Merced, CA	54	$419k	$2,010	5.8%	▲ 3.5%
9	Red Bluff, CA	53	$327k	$1,593	5.9%	▲ 0.7%
10	Fresno, CA	52	$411k	$2,043	6.0%	▲ 0.9%
11	San Francisco, CA	52	$1142k	$3,301	3.5%	▲ 0.1%
12	Sacramento, CA	49	$584k	$2,308	4.7%	▲ 0.7%

Showing the top 12 scored metros of 32. Unscored metros remain discoverable through the national rankings.

Below the metro line

Largest counties in California

County figures join on the five-digit FIPS code. The table uses measured local values and prints “n/a” wherever a publisher has no record.

County	Population	Price	Rent	Yield	Hazard
Los Angeles County, CA	9,808,667	$888k	$2,808	3.8%	earthquake
San Diego County, CA	3,288,774	$941k	$2,991	3.8%	inland flooding
Orange County, CA	3,165,820	$1195k	$3,186	3.2%	inland flooding
Riverside County, CA	2,478,600	$609k	$2,591	5.1%	inland flooding
San Bernardino County, CA	2,197,104	$554k	$2,489	5.4%	inland flooding
Santa Clara County, CA	1,902,047	$1624k	$3,732	2.8%	earthquake
Alameda County, CA	1,649,473	$1077k	$2,895	3.2%	earthquake
Sacramento County, CA	1,594,006	$533k	$2,197	5.0%	inland flooding
Contra Costa County, CA	1,165,012	$787k	$2,901	4.4%	inland flooding
Fresno County, CA	1,016,725	$411k	$2,043	6.0%	inland flooding
Kern County, CA	915,075	$366k	$1,776	5.8%	inland flooding
Ventura County, CA	837,469	$884k	$2,957	4.0%	inland flooding

County yield sample48/58counties have the rent needed to compute yield

Statewide net migration−100,509IRS tax-return households summed across counties

Median investor share8.2%among counties with HMDA purchase records

Published city evidence

Go from California to a city record

These links exist only where an official Census place, direct city price and rent series, and a checked city brief are all available.

City · CALos Angeles$949k home · $2,773 rent · 3.5% yield City · CASan Diego$1002k home · $3,038 rent · 3.6% yield City · CASan Jose$1414k home · $3,479 rent · 3.0% yield City · CASan Francisco$1396k home · $4,401 rent · 3.8% yield City · CAFresno$393k home · $1,954 rent · 6.0% yield City · CASacramento$483k home · $2,071 rent · 5.1% yield City · CALong Beach$863k home · $2,364 rent · 3.3% yield City · CAOakland$722k home · $2,614 rent · 4.3% yield City · CABakersfield$392k home · $1,865 rent · 5.7% yield City · CAAnaheim$955k home · $2,674 rent · 3.4% yield City · CAStockton$431k home · $1,989 rent · 5.5% yield City · CARiverside$648k home · $2,420 rent · 4.5% yield

Sources used in this analysis

Measured releases, not a global source count

Only sources supporting the selected evidence modules are listed here.

Bear case

What can break the thesis

Net out-migration may undercut a rent-growth thesis where local job gains do not translate into additional renter households.
High renter burdens may limit rent increases and raise collection or turnover risk even in markets with favorable gross yields.
Gross yields omit financing, insurance, taxes, maintenance, management and vacancy, so they cannot establish net cash flow.
Coverage is uneven: county rents cover 48 of 58 counties, county rent growth 44, county listings 53 and metro resale measures 30.
County hazard labels and loss ratios are too broad to determine parcel exposure, insurability or property-specific premiums.

Investor questions

Before underwriting a property

Is broad home-price appreciation supporting the measured rental case?

No. Median metro home-value growth was -0.5%, and the 10th-to-90th percentile range ran from -2.3% to 2.8%. The stronger measured signal was the 3.2-percentage-point gap between rent and value growth.

Does positive job growth establish expanding rental demand?

No. Median metro job growth was 0.7%, but California had net migration of -100,509 across all 58 counties. The measures also cover different periods and do not identify neighborhood-level renter formation.

Where does the packet show stronger headline yield, and what is the constraint?

Among the highlighted markets, Hanford, Clearlake and Visalia had gross yields of 6.5%, 6.4% and 6.0%. Their rent-to-income ratios were 33.5%, 33.0% and 30.7%, and the yields exclude operating and financing costs.

Do the slower resale markets automatically offer attractive entry points?

No. Clearlake and Ukiah had 8.2 and 8.6 months of supply, with sale-to-list ratios of 96.6% and 97.8%. Those figures may support price negotiation, but they do not establish rental absorption, property condition or eventual resale liquidity.

Can the county hazard counts be used to judge a specific property's exposure?

No. Inland flood, earthquake and wildfire are mutually exclusive leading-hazard labels assigned at county level. They do not show parcel-level exposure, insurance availability or expected property-specific loss.