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 risk14 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
Direct monthly rental evidence

California rent market dynamics

Apartment List measures recent leases, rental vacancy and listing time separately. These figures do not replace Zillow, Census or Realtor measures elsewhere on this page.

Recent-lease rent$2,2342026-07 · ▲ 1.5% year over year
Rental Vacancy Index4.9%2026-07 · −0.3 pp in 12 months
Time on market26 days2026-07 · +1 days in 12 months
US recent-lease rent$1,3882026-07 · ▼ 1.1% year over year
Rent and rental vacancy through timesolid state series · dashed national series · no interpolation across missing observations
Recent-lease rent$2,380$1,654$927Rental Vacancy Index7.8%5.3%2.9%2017-012021-102026-07CaliforniaUnited States
State research brief

Rents are rising as home values soften across measured metros, yet net out-migration and uneven exit liquidity make California a locality-first screen rather than a broad yield thesis.

Updated 2026-08-08 · evidence current to the releases listed below.

The clearest measured tension is between rents and home values. Across 32 metros, median rent growth was 2.7% while median home-value growth was -0.5%, a supplied gap of 3.2 percentage points. Recent-lease data also showed state rent growth and lower rental vacancy, although time on market edged higher. The combination supports closer screening where rent growth improves the relationship between income and acquisition cost, but it does not establish that every locality—or any specific property—has stronger cash flow.

The main counter-signal is demand composition: measured metro employment was modestly positive at the median while county migration was negative overall. Affordability pressure, high-vacancy counties and slow resale markets further limit a statewide conclusion. Coverage is also incomplete: county rent observations exist for 48 of 58 counties, leaving 10 unmeasured, calculated as 58 minus 48. The packet does not provide property expenses, insurance quotes, financing terms, achieved rents or parcel-level hazard exposure.

01

Median metro rent growth of 2.7% versus -0.5% home-value growth → focus basis screening on local rent support rather than assuming statewide appreciation

02

State recent-lease rent rose 1.5% and rental vacancy fell 0.3 percentage point → occupancy conditions look firmer, but the 0.7-day increase in marketing time supports conservative lease-up assumptions

03

Median metro employment grew 0.7% while net migration was -100,509 → require local evidence that jobs and renter households support the target submarket

04

Measured metro gross yields ranged from 3.7% to 5.9% between the 10th and 90th percentiles → compare acquisition economics locally and stress-test higher-yield markets for affordability pressure

05

Clearlake and Ukiah each had more than 8 months of resale supply → include a longer and more price-sensitive exit case in those measured markets

01
Price and rent momentum

Rents outrun soft home values, with a wide local spread

Across the 32 measured metros, median rent growth was 2.7% while median home-value growth was -0.5%. The 10th-to-90th percentile range was 1.0% to 7.9% for rent growth and -2.3% to 2.8% for home-value growth. The supplied median difference was 3.2 percentage points, indicating that rents and values were not moving together in the typical measured metro.

The local pattern varies. El Centro recorded 9.3% rent growth alongside 6.5% home-value growth and a 5.5% gross yield. San Francisco recorded 8.2% rent growth, 0.1% home-value growth and a 3.5% gross yield. Rent-price separation can improve an acquisition screen, but it does not by itself establish an attractive basis or a viable net return.

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

02
Direct state rental dynamics

Recent leases show lower vacancy, but marketing time edged up

The state recent-lease rent measure rose from $2,201 to $2,234, or 1.5% year over year. In its separate series, rental vacancy declined from 5.2% to 4.9%, a 0.3 percentage-point decrease. Time on market moved the other way, rising from 25.0 to 25.7 days.

Against the supplied national series, state rent growth was 2.6 percentage points higher, current rental vacancy was 2.2 percentage points lower and current time on market was 4.3 days shorter. Those comparisons support a firmer state-level rental reading, but the 0.7-day increase in marketing time is a genuine counter-signal. Rent, vacancy and time on market are separate measures with different coverage and should not be combined into a single occupancy metric.

Evidence: Apartment List Rent Estimates — recent-lease rent index · Apartment List Time on Market — listing liquidity · Apartment List Vacancy Index — rental vacancy

03
Employment and household movement

Modest job growth coexists with a net loss of movers

Employment growth across 32 measured metros had a 0.7% median, with the 10th-to-90th percentile range running from -0.6% to 2.1%. Merced recorded 3.5% job growth, while Yuba City recorded 2.1%. This shows positive labor-market readings in selected metros, not uniform growth across the state.

Migration points in the opposite direction. Across 58 counties, 736,699 movers entered and 837,208 left, producing net migration of -100,509, or -2.6 per 1,000 residents. A counter-signal within the migration data is that reported aggregate incoming adjusted gross income exceeded outgoing adjusted gross income by $313,517. The employment and migration series cover different measurement frameworks and cannot establish why households moved, whether movers were renters or whether local job growth retained residents.

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

04
Housing stock and tenant conditions

High renter burden appears under very different vacancy conditions

Across 58 counties, the median renter share was 37.2%, and the median share of renters spending at least 30% of income on rent was 54.8%. The 10th-to-90th percentile burden range was 44.3% to 59.3%. The median single-family share of housing was 74.4%, making local property type and tenant pool important parts of the screen.

High burden does not consistently coincide with low broad housing vacancy. Lake County had 61.9% renter burden and 21.7% ACS vacancy; Solano County had 60.2% burden and 4.4% vacancy; Humboldt County had 60.1% burden and 12.7% vacancy. ACS vacancy covers the wider housing stock and is not the Apartment List rental Vacancy Index. These county figures show tenant strain, but they do not establish available rental inventory or room for further rent increases.

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

05
Entry cost and affordability

Higher headline yields come with material tenant-income pressure

Across 32 measured metros, the median gross yield was 4.7%, with a 10th-to-90th percentile range of 3.7% to 5.9%. Median price to income was 6.6, ranging from 5.1 to 9.7, while median rent to income was 32.1%, ranging from 27.7% to 36.6%. The distributions show that entry cost, headline yield and tenant affordability vary materially by metro.

Hanford paired a $367,650 home value and $1,983 monthly rent with a 6.5% gross yield, while rent represented 33.5% of measured income. Clearlake paired a $311,709 value and $1,666 rent with a 6.4% gross yield and 33.0% rent to income. These are stronger headline yields than the measured-metro median, but the income ratios argue for conservative rent and collection assumptions. Gross yield does not deduct financing, maintenance, taxes, insurance, vacancy loss or management costs.

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

06
Supply and resale conditions

Quick building markets sit beside much slower resale exits

Across 30 measured metros, median resale supply was 3.3 months, median days on market was 34.5 and the median price-drop share was 26.6%. The 90th percentiles were 5.9 months and 47.2 days. Clearlake stood well beyond those thresholds at 8.2 months and 91 days, with a 96.6% sale-to-list ratio. Ukiah had 8.6 months of supply, 56 days on market and a 97.8% sale-to-list ratio.

Permitting and current resale pressure do not always align. Hanford had 1,126 permitted units, or 7.35 per 1,000 residents, while showing 2.0 months of supply and 24 days on market. Sacramento had 11,094 permits, or 4.57 per 1,000, with 2.7 months of supply, 20 days on market and a 31.8% price-drop share. Permits do not establish completed rental supply, and resale marketing measures do not measure rental lease-up. Both need separate treatment in acquisition and exit screening.

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

State ZIP rental intelligence

How direct rental evidence varies inside California

The distribution uses 33 current published ZIP reports across 18 cities and 9 counties. Twelve measured counter-signals are shown below; this is not a statewide neighborhood ranking.

Published ZIP rent range$2,146$5,472full direct-ZORI report cohort
Median rent / income30.0%annual asking rent ÷ ACS household income
Median one-year growth▲ 6.5%exact direct Zillow endpoints
Renter households covered359,943across published ZCTA matches
01 · RENT DISPERSIONRepresentative direct ZIP ZORI
Horizontal bars compare direct Zillow asking-rent indexes for the twelve representative published ZIP reports.94114$5,47294110$4,32795051$3,83495134$3,71894109$3,70995123$3,43594501$2,92890026$2,73990044$2,35594610$2,35290805$2,14990250$2,146
02 · AFFORDABILITY PRESSURERent / income × observed burden
Horizontal position is annual Zillow asking rent divided by ACS median household income. Vertical position is the ACS share of renter households paying thirty percent or more.67.3%55.7%44.1%32.5%20.9%941099025090026900449080594110945019505195134946109512394114Annual asking rent / ACS household income →ACS renter burden share →
03 · PATH QUALITYOne-year growth × variability
Each point compares exact one-year Zillow asking-rent growth with annualized variability from the direct monthly series.5.4%4.3%3.1%2.0%0.9%941099025090026900449080594110945019505195134946109512394114Exact one-year Zillow rent growth →Annualized monthly variability →
WHAT THE STATE DISTRIBUTION SAYS

California's practical ZIP-level question is not a single rent level but how far a household's target area lies from the middle of the published evidence. Across 33 current direct-evidence ZIP reports, the June 2026 Zillow ZORI observed asking-rent index runs from $2,146 to $5,472, a $3,326 spread around a $3,588 median. That dispersion makes local budget screening more useful than a statewide shorthand: compare the current index level with household income context, historical path, and the relevant program benchmark. The state distribution is limited to current published direct-evidence ZIP reports, rather than every California ZIP, neighborhood, listing, or rental property. It is therefore a structured comparison set, not a complete rental-market census.

Affordability screening and renter burden are complementary but are not the same measure. The distribution's current ZORI-to-median-household-income ratio has a 30.0% median, while the ACS 2024 five-year ZCTA median share of renter households paying at least 30% of income toward gross rent is 46.0%. The distinction is material in the displayed contrasts: 90044 shows a 53.0% asking-rent-to-income ratio and a 64.8% burden share, whereas 95134 is 21.9% and 23.4%. Using a 30% income screen, the displayed annual income requirement ranges from $85,840 to $218,880. The first calculation applies current asking-rent evidence to a median-income reference; the ACS measure reflects renter households' income distribution and gross rents, including existing tenancies. Neither figure says what share of today's listings is affordable to a particular household.

Rent momentum must be read alongside variability in the direct monthly Zillow series, not inferred from ACS or HUD. Across published reports, one-year growth ranges from -0.1% to 21.7%, with a 6.5% median; annualized volatility ranges from 1.9% to 4.4%, median 3.0%. A large recent increase need not mean a smooth history: 94109 posted 21.7% one-year growth, yet its series is categorized high variability and has a 19.2% maximum drawdown. Nor does a category label make the measures interchangeable: the accelerating label, volatility, and drawdown describe different aspects of the historical series. These are retrospective descriptions of the measured ZORI path; compare direction and swings rather than treating growth as a forecast.

HUD supplies a separate administrative two-bedroom benchmark, not a measure of current asking rent. The published median ZORI-to-HUD two-bedroom ratio is 96.8%, spanning 65.3% to 151.8%. That relationship is useful for testing how an area-level asking-rent index lines up with an applicable HUD standard, but it does not establish that a given listed unit is above or below its relevant standard. ZIP-level evidence cannot identify a property's bedroom count, lease terms, utilities, unit condition, availability, or actual contract rent. Confirm the particular program's geography, bedroom rule, and unit details before applying a HUD figure to a household or property.

Representative direct evidence

Twelve useful contrasts, every one traceable

The statewide summaries use all 33 qualifying reports. The table preserves measured extremes in rent, affordability, burden, momentum, volatility and the HUD benchmark gap.

ZIP reportPlaceZillow rent1Y growthRent / incomeBurden 30%+VariabilityHUD 2BR gap
94109San Francisco$3,709▲ 21.7%42.0%41.3%3.6%▲ 102.9%
90250Hawthorne$2,146▲ 1.5%32.9%56.9%2.3%▲ 69.9%
90026Los Angeles$2,739▲ 1.4%37.6%47.6%2.8%▲ 89.2%
90044Los Angeles$2,355▼ 0.1%53.0%64.8%4.4%▲ 76.7%
90805Long Beach$2,149▲ 0.2%35.1%55.2%3.2%▲ 70.0%
94110San Francisco$4,327▲ 18.3%32.8%34.9%3.3%▲ 120.1%
94501Alameda$2,928▲ 5.7%27.5%44.2%2.3%▲ 81.2%
95051Santa Clara$3,834▲ 6.6%23.4%28.7%2.3%▲ 96.8%
95134San Jose$3,718▲ 7.0%21.9%23.4%2.7%▲ 78.4%
94610Oakland$2,352▲ 3.8%21.0%32.7%2.2%▲ 65.3%
95123San Jose$3,435▲ 6.5%28.6%54.2%1.9%▲ 97.0%
94114San Francisco$5,472▲ 18.7%32.2%30.4%3.2%▲ 151.8%
READ BEFORE USING

Zillow ZORI is an observed monthly asking-rent index, not a record of signed leases or every available rental. Its ZIP-level values cannot identify unit bedrooms, condition, utilities, concessions, lease terms, availability, or a specific property's rent.

ACS values are 2024 five-year survey estimates for ZCTAs, which are statistical areas rather than identical USPS delivery ZIPs. Median income, gross rent, renter households, vacancy, and burden measures therefore have different geography, timing, and measurement from the current Zillow series; HUD FMR/SAFMR is separately administrative.

SOURCE LEDGERCensus ACS five-year — ZCTA housing and incomeACS 2024 5-year ZCTA · pulled 2026-08-08HUD USPS crosswalk and Small Area FMRs — ZIP rent fallbackZIP-CBSA 2025Q4 + SAFMR FY2026 · pulled 2026-07-26Zillow ZORI — ZIP market rentsZORI ZIP 2026-06 · pulled 2026-08-08
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?
10th pct.median90th pct.Home-value change-2.3%-0.5%2.8%Asking-rent change1.0%2.7%7.9%Rent minus price3.2%
Employment and household movementDo jobs, household movement and mover income point in the same direction?
10th pct.median90th pct.Job change-0.6%0.7%2.1%Net migration / 1k-2.6Net household movement-100.5K
Housing stock and tenant conditionsWhat kind of housing exists, how much is vacant and how burdened are renters?
10th pct.median90th pct.Vacancy rate5.0%10.1%31.2%Renter share25.0%37.2%45.7%Rent burden 30%+44.3%54.8%59.3%Single-family share62.0%74.4%83.4%
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
10–191020–391740–59460–79080–100
County evidence coverageEvery gap stays visible as missing—not estimated
83%48/58Rent100%58/58Climate100%58/58Migration
Highest measured metro gross yieldsscreening metric only · before expenses and financing
Hanford6.5%Clearlake6.4%Visalia6.0%Fresno6.0%Red Bluff5.9%Bakersfield5.8%Merced5.8%
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.

#MetroScorePriceRentYieldJobs
1Gardnerville Ranchos, NV66$709k$2,6184.4%▲ 4.7%
2San Jose, CA64$1584k$3,7292.8%▲ 1.4%
3Salinas, CA62$855k$2,9064.1%▲ 1.4%
4Redding, CA60$377k$1,6505.3%▲ 2.1%
5El Centro, CA56$381k$1,7565.5%▲ 0.9%
6Sonora, CA56$396k$1,4724.5%▼ 0.1%
7Yuba City, CA55$434k$2,0115.6%▲ 2.1%
8Merced, CA54$419k$2,0105.8%▲ 3.5%
9Red Bluff, CA53$327k$1,5935.9%▲ 0.7%
10Fresno, CA52$411k$2,0436.0%▲ 0.9%
11San Francisco, CA52$1142k$3,3013.5%▲ 0.1%
12Sacramento, CA49$584k$2,3084.7%▲ 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.

CountyPopulationPriceRentYieldHazard
Los Angeles County, CA9,808,667$888k$2,8083.8%earthquake
San Diego County, CA3,288,774$941k$2,9913.8%inland flooding
Orange County, CA3,165,820$1195k$3,1863.2%inland flooding
Riverside County, CA2,478,600$609k$2,5915.1%inland flooding
San Bernardino County, CA2,197,104$554k$2,4895.4%inland flooding
Santa Clara County, CA1,902,047$1624k$3,7322.8%earthquake
Alameda County, CA1,649,473$1077k$2,8953.2%earthquake
Sacramento County, CA1,594,006$533k$2,1975.0%inland flooding
Contra Costa County, CA1,165,012$787k$2,9014.4%inland flooding
Fresno County, CA1,016,725$411k$2,0436.0%inland flooding
Kern County, CA915,075$366k$1,7765.8%inland flooding
Ventura County, CA837,469$884k$2,9574.0%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
Bear case

What can break the thesis

  1. The rent-price divergence may not translate into property cash flow because the measures do not provide achieved unit rents, transaction prices or operating expenses.
  2. County rent coverage reaches 48 of 58 counties, leaving 10 counties without a measured county rent observation.
  3. Employment and migration use different measurement frameworks and periods, so their apparent conflict cannot identify current renter demand or its cause.
  4. ACS burden and vacancy describe broad county housing conditions and may not represent current rental availability in a target neighborhood.
  5. Leading FEMA hazard labels are county-level classifications, not parcel exposure or insurance pricing; financing, insurance and property-condition costs remain unmeasured.
Investor questions

Before underwriting a property

Are rents broadly outpacing home values in the measured metros?

At the median, yes: rent growth was 2.7% and home-value growth was -0.5%, a 3.2 percentage-point difference. The result is a distribution, not a claim about every metro.

Does the state rental series show unambiguously faster leasing?

No. Recent-lease rent increased 1.5% and rental vacancy declined to 4.9%, but time on market increased by 0.7 day to 25.7 days. These are separate measures and provide a mixed liquidity signal.

Does positive employment growth offset the migration loss?

The packet cannot establish that. Median metro employment growth was 0.7%, while county migration totaled -100,509; the data do not show whether movers were renters or whether job growth retained households.

Do the higher-yield metros offer uncomplicated affordability?

No. Hanford and Clearlake had gross yields of 6.5% and 6.4%, but their measured rent-to-income ratios were 33.5% and 33.0%. Gross yield also excludes operating and financing costs.

Where does the packet show notable resale-exit friction?

Clearlake had 8.2 months of supply and 91 days on market, while Ukiah had 8.6 months and 56 days. Those figures flag local exit friction but do not measure rental listing time.