States / Montana

State rental intelligence

Montana rental market data

A source-traced view across 7 metro markets and 56 counties. State figures below are labelled medians and totals—not a made-up statewide investment score.

7/7 metros scored56/56 counties with FEMA risk13 sources used in this analysis

Median scored metro42.0out of 100 · 7 measured metros

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

Median metro home value$480kmedian across published metro values

Median metro rent$1,567monthly · published metro values

Median gross yield4.1%annual rent ÷ price · before costs

Median job trend▼ 0.2%trailing 12-month metro employment

State research brief

Rising rents and home values sit beside negative median job growth and a 20.5% median price-drop share across measured Montana metros.

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

Across seven measured metros, median home-value growth was 2.34% and median rent growth was 2.22%, a rent-growth lag of 0.12 percentage points. The demand evidence is less consistent: median job growth was negative 0.2%, while 46 measured counties reported net migration of 3,081 people, or 2.76 per 1,000 residents, and a positive aggregate mover-income gap of $326,782.

This combination supports locality-by-locality screening rather than a broad Montana demand thesis. The measured metro median gross yield was 4.1%, while resale conditions included 4.5 months of supply, 59 days on market and a 20.5% price-drop share. These figures can help compare entry cost, rent support and exit friction, but they are distributions rather than conditions in every locality and cannot establish property-level demand, net operating income or future appreciation.

Seven-metro median rent growth of 2.22% versus value growth of 2.34% → underwrite current rent gains without assuming gross-yield expansion

Negative 0.2% median job growth alongside net migration of 3,081 → treat demand as mixed and verify local tenant drivers

Median resale conditions of 4.5 months of supply, 59 days on market and a 20.5% price-drop share → allow for exit friction rather than assuming immediate resale

Metro gross yields spanning 3.43% to 5.03% → market selection materially changes the initial income screen

Median county renter burden of 39.5% alongside 19.3% all-unit vacancy → verify usable rental inventory and tenant payment capacity separately

Price and rent momentum

Rent gains narrowly trail value growth, with local reversals

All seven measured metros fall within positive year-over-year bands for both series: rent growth runs from 1.53% at the 10th percentile to 4.32% at the 90th, while home-value growth runs from 0.16% to 4.14%. Their medians are almost aligned, with rent growth of 2.22% trailing value growth of 2.34% by 0.12 percentage points.

Rent growth exceeded value growth in each named example. Great Falls, MT posted 5.17% rent growth versus 3.66% value growth and a 4.74% gross yield. Missoula, MT recorded 3.75% versus 1.17%, but its gross yield was only 3.23%. Billings, MT recorded 3.5% versus 2.34% and a 4.2% gross yield. Rent momentum therefore does not by itself identify the strongest income entry point.

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

Employment and household movement

Migration offsets a soft employment reading, but only as a counter-signal

Measured job growth is weak across the seven-metro distribution. The median was negative 0.2%, with a 10th-to-90th-percentile range from negative 1.28% to positive 0.3%. Kalispell, MT was the named exception at positive 1%, while Bozeman, MT and Helena, MT were negative 0.16% and negative 0.17%, respectively.

Household movement provides a genuine counter-signal. Across 46 counties with migration data, 33,425 people moved in and 30,348 moved out, producing net migration of 3,081, or 2.76 per 1,000 residents. The reported aggregate mover-income gap was also positive at $326,782. That supports further local demand checks, but the migration and employment sources cover different periods and cannot establish that current rent gains are job-supported.

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

Supply and resale conditions

Kalispell has the loosest resale conditions among the named metros

Across seven measured metros, months of supply had a median of 4.5 and a 10th-to-90th-percentile range of 3.94 to 5.48. Median marketing time was 59 days, and the median price-drop share was 20.5%. These readings argue against assuming a rapid resale at the initial asking price.

Kalispell, MT had 6.5 months of supply and 72 days on market, compared with 4.7 months and 70 days in Bozeman, MT and 4.3 months and 65 days in Helena, MT. Price-drop shares were 19.5%, 17.6% and 21.1%, respectively. Permit intensity also differed: 6.76 units per 1,000 in Kalispell, 10.85 in Bozeman and 8.37 in Helena. Permits are not completed units, but the combination makes local inventory and exit timing necessary parts of screening.

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

Entry cost and affordability

Lower entry prices improve gross yield without guaranteeing tenant headroom

Entry economics vary substantially across the measured metros. Home values run from $324,124 at the 10th percentile to $675,468 at the 90th, while monthly rents run from $1,353 to $2,059. Gross yields span 3.43% to 5.03%, with a 4.12% median. The median price-to-income ratio was 6.11, and the median rent-to-income measure was 25.16%.

Butte, MT had the strongest named gross yield at 5.47%, based on a $292,640 value and $1,334 monthly rent. Its price-to-income ratio was 4.74, but rent represented 25.91% of income. Great Falls, MT showed a 4.74% yield, 5.1 price-to-income ratio and 24.19% rent-to-income measure; Billings, MT showed 4.2%, 5.34 and 22.45%. Butte's lower acquisition multiple therefore does not automatically imply more room for tenants to absorb rent.

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

Housing stock and tenant conditions

High renter burden coexists with broad housing vacancy

Across all 56 counties, the median ACS housing-vacancy rate was 19.3%, while the median renter share was 27.6%. At the same time, the median share of renters spending at least 30% of income on rent was 39.5%, reaching 50% at the 90th percentile. The vacancy measure covers all housing units, not just units offered for long-term rent, so it cannot be treated as a rental-availability rate.

Musselshell County had 61.5% of renters above the burden threshold, a 14.9% renter share and 19.3% vacancy. Broadwater County recorded 58.2%, 12.2% and 11.2%, respectively; Sanders County recorded 56.2%, 18.7% and 19.9%. These combinations point to tenant payment stress within relatively limited renter bases, not proof of a statewide rental shortage or of current rent-collection performance.

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

Physical risk and property tax

Hazard-loss and property-tax screens identify different county cost hotspots

Across 56 counties, the median expected hazard-loss ratio was 0.15%, with a 10th-to-90th-percentile range of 0.09% to 0.24%. Carbon County recorded 0.4%, Ravalli County 0.31% and Rosebud County 0.28%. These are county-level screening ratios, not expected losses for a particular building.

The median effective property-tax rate was 0.68%, and the 90th percentile was 1.07%. Blaine County recorded 1.34%, Roosevelt County 1.28% and Sheridan County 1.23%. FEMA's mutually exclusive leading-hazard labels identify inland flood for 54 counties and wildfire for two; those labels do not indicate that every parcel has that exposure. Property-level tax, insurance and hazard checks remain separate from the county screen.

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

Evidence selected for Montana

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?

Supply and resale conditionsWhat do permits, inventory, marketing time and price cuts say about pressure?

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 distribution7 scored metros · median 42.0

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 Montana

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	Butte, MT	45	$293k	$1,334	5.5%	▼ 0.2%
2	Billings, MT	43	$413k	$1,444	4.2%	▼ 0.5%
3	Missoula, MT	43	$583k	$1,567	3.2%	▼ 0.2%
4	Great Falls, MT	42	$345k	$1,365	4.7%	▼ 2.5%
5	Kalispell, MT	37	$654k	$1,940	3.6%	▲ 1.0%
6	Helena, MT	35	$480k	$1,647	4.1%	▼ 0.2%
7	Bozeman, MT	29	$708k	$2,237	3.8%	▼ 0.2%

Below the metro line

Largest counties in Montana

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
Yellowstone County, MT	168,957	$403k	$1,444	4.3%	inland flooding
Gallatin County, MT	124,074	$708k	$2,237	3.8%	inland flooding
Missoula County, MT	120,672	$583k	$1,567	3.2%	inland flooding
Flathead County, MT	110,695	$654k	$1,940	3.6%	inland flooding
Cascade County, MT	84,606	$345k	$1,365	4.8%	inland flooding
Lewis and Clark County, MT	73,464	$472k	$1,648	4.2%	inland flooding
Ravalli County, MT	46,727	$614k	$1,882	3.7%	wildfire
Silver Bow County, MT	35,785	$293k	$1,334	5.5%	inland flooding
Lake County, MT	32,561	$606k	$1,425	2.8%	inland flooding
Lincoln County, MT	21,175	$435k	n/a	n/a	inland flooding
Park County, MT	17,710	$617k	$1,433	2.8%	inland flooding
Hill County, MT	16,155	$239k	$988	5.0%	inland flooding

County yield sample13/56counties have the rent needed to compute yield

Statewide net migration+3,081IRS tax-return households summed across counties

Median investor share6.7%among counties with HMDA purchase records

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

State-specific coverage gap: rent growth is measured for seven metros and eight counties, while county rent levels cover only 13 of Montana's 56 counties; unmeasured rural markets may not follow the displayed distributions.
The packet contains zero measured metro sale-to-list records, so the resale screen relies on supply, marketing time and price-drop indicators rather than achieved sale-to-list spreads.
Migration, employment, housing and market-price sources cover different periods, so their alignment cannot establish a current causal demand relationship.
Gross yields omit operating expenses, financing, taxes, insurance, maintenance and vacancy, and therefore may overstate property-level income performance.
County FEMA leading-hazard labels and loss ratios cannot determine parcel exposure, insurability or the premium for a specific property.

Investor questions

Before underwriting a property

Are rents materially outrunning home values in measured Montana metros?

Not at the distribution median. Rent growth was 2.22% versus 2.34% for home values, a 0.12-percentage-point lag, although Great Falls, Missoula and Billings each had faster rent growth than value growth.

Does measured demand clearly support the rent gains?

No. Median job growth was negative 0.2%, but 46 counties reported net migration of 3,081 and a positive aggregate mover-income gap of $326,782. The indicators are mixed and cover different periods.

Which named lower-cost metro has the strongest gross-yield screen?

Butte had the highest named gross yield at 5.47%, compared with 4.74% in Great Falls and 4.2% in Billings. Those are gross measures and do not include property expenses.

Where does the packet show the most resale friction among named metros?

Kalispell had 6.5 months of supply and 72 days on market, both higher than the named Bozeman and Helena readings. The packet has no metro sale-to-list observations, so realized negotiation discounts are unknown.

Can the county hazard labels identify a safe property?

No. They identify only each county's mutually exclusive leading hazard: inland flood for 54 counties and wildfire for two. They do not measure parcel-level exposure, insurance availability or a building's expected loss.