States / Tennessee
State rental intelligence

Tennessee rental market data

A source-traced view across 23 metro markets and 95 counties. State figures below are labelled medians and totals—not a made-up statewide investment score.

16/23 metros scored95/95 counties with FEMA risk13 sources used in this analysis
Median scored metro38.0out of 100 · 16 measured metros
Tennessee identity diorama showing regional landscape, cities, housing, and infrastructure
Median metro home value$294kmedian across published metro values
Median metro rent$1,455monthly · published metro values
Median gross yield5.6%annual rent ÷ price · before costs
Median job trend▲ 0.2%trailing 12-month metro employment
State research brief

The metro median is price-led, but Sevierville is rent-led: across 23 measured metros, home-price growth was 1.9% versus 1.4% rent growth, while Sevierville rents rose 11.9% as prices fell 1.3%.

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

Measured Tennessee markets do not form one rent-growth story. The metro-level rent-minus-price spread was -0.4 percentage points, yet Greeneville and Kingsport also posted faster rent than price growth, at 6.4% versus 3.3% and 6.0% versus 1.2%, respectively. Screening therefore needs to distinguish local rent momentum from the broader metro distribution.

Demand offers a counter-signal: the 95 counties with migration data recorded 221,190 movers in and 196,648 out, for net migration of 24,542, while metro job growth had a 0.2% median. At the same time, 22 metros had a median 4.2 months of supply and 29.7% price cuts. The evidence is useful for local screening, but rent growth is measured in only 16 metros and 30 counties, so it does not support a uniform statewide rental conclusion.

01

Metro median price growth of 1.9% exceeded rent growth of 1.4%, while Sevierville rent grew 11.9% as price fell 1.3% → underwrite by market and property segment rather than applying one Tennessee rent-growth assumption.

02

Positive county net migration of 24,542 coexisted with metro job growth ranging from -0.7% to 0.9% → verify local employer and income depth instead of treating migration as uniform rental demand.

03

The median metro supply level was 4.2 months and the median price-cut share was 29.7% → test purchase pricing and resale liquidity at the property and market level.

04

County investor share ranged from 4.2% to 12.6% at the distribution level, while Sevier County reached 37.1% → assess local acquisition competition before assuming a favorable buying environment.

05

Seventy-nine counties had inland flood as the leading FEMA hazard label and 16 had earthquake → require parcel-level hazard, insurance, and deductible checks before underwriting.

01
Price and rent momentum

Sevierville's rent surge sits outside the metro middle

Across 23 measured metros, the median home-price increase was 1.9%, compared with 1.4% rent growth. The supplied rent-minus-price spread was -0.4 percentage points. The ranges were also broad: price growth ran from -0.4% to 6.7%, while rent growth among 16 measured metros ran from 0.3% to 6.2%.

Sevierville was a clear local exception, with rent at $1,698 and rent growth of 11.9% alongside a $409,653 price and a 1.3% price decline. Greeneville recorded 6.4% rent growth against 3.3% price growth, and Kingsport recorded 6.0% against 1.2%. These figures support market-specific rent and basis screening, but they do not establish whether the rent increases are durable, apply to every property type, or represent achieved rent for a specific unit.

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

02
Supply and resale conditions

Resale friction spans both deep and moderate inventory

Among the 22 metros with months-of-supply data, the median was 4.2 months, with a 3.2-to-6.0-month range. Median days on market were 62.5, and the median share of listings with price cuts was 29.7%, ranging from 23.6% to 32.9%. That combination points to a purchase market where pricing and exit liquidity need to be checked rather than assumed.

Local conditions diverged materially. Sevierville had 11.3 months of supply, 67 days on market, and 29.3% price cuts, while Lewisburg had 4.4 months, 78 days, and 32.2% cuts. Union City had 133 days on market, 6.2 months of supply, and a 92.1% sale-to-list ratio; Martin had only 2.8 months of supply but an 87-day median and a 93.8% sale-to-list ratio. These resale measures do not establish rental vacancy, lease-up time, or property-level operating performance.

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

03
Employment and household movement

Migration adds demand, but payroll growth is uneven

The migration data are a genuine positive counter-signal: all 95 counties in the migration measure were covered, with 221,190 movers in, 196,648 movers out, and net migration of 24,542. Net migration was 3.5 per 1,000 residents. This supports checking tenant demand in markets that can demonstrate local capture of that movement.

Employment does not provide an equally uniform signal. Metro job growth had a 0.2% median and ranged from -0.7% to 0.9%. McMinnville and Kingsport showed 1.2% job growth, while Knoxville showed 0.9%. The combination suggests testing employer and income depth at the market level; aggregate migration does not prove rental demand, renter qualification, or sustained job creation in a particular submarket.

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

04
Entry cost and affordability

Lower entry prices produce wider yield and burden outcomes

The 23-metro median was a $294,345 price, $1,455 monthly rent, 5.6% gross yield, 26.0% rent-to-income ratio, and 4.7 price-to-income ratio. The measured yield range was 4.9% to 6.9%; rent-to-income ranged from 21.4% to 30.5%. The metro rent-to-FMR2 median was 120.4%, with a range from 99.4% to 158.4%, so HUD's two-bedroom benchmark does not align uniformly with measured market rents.

Jackson paired a $210,372 price with $1,455 rent and an 8.3% gross yield, but its rent-to-income ratio was 28.5%. Union City had a lower $168,371 price, $1,021 rent, and 7.3% gross yield, with a 22.4% rent-to-income ratio. Memphis had a $247,919 price, $1,435 rent, and 6.9% gross yield. These are screening inputs, not net returns: the packet does not supply financing, insurance, maintenance, management, or other property-level expenses.

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

05
Investor participation

Investor buying is highly concentrated in selected counties

Across 95 counties, the median investor share of purchases was 7.5%, with a 4.2% to 12.6% distribution. The packet recorded 88,843 total purchases and 9,477 investor purchases. This supports treating investor competition as a local market condition rather than a statewide constant.

Sevier County stood well above the county distribution with 602 investor purchases out of 1,622 total and a 37.1% investor share. Shelby County recorded 1,950 investor purchases out of 8,318 and a 23.4% share, while Haywood County recorded 20 out of 104 and a 19.2% share. Their reported gross yields were 5.0%, 7.5%, and 6.3%, respectively. Investor share identifies purchase competition, not rental performance or the cause of local price movement.

Evidence: HMDA / CFPB — purchases by occupancy type

06
Physical risk and property tax

Leading hazards and tax bills vary by county

Among the 95 counties, 79 had inland flood as the leading FEMA hazard label and 16 had earthquake as the leading label. These labels are mutually exclusive county-level classifications, not parcel-level exposure determinations. The county climate-loss-ratio median was 0.16%, with a 0.12% to 0.23% range; the median effective property-tax rate was 0.47%, with a 0.37% to 0.59% range, and the median tax bill was $921.

County examples show why the screen must remain local. Lake County had a 0.39% climate loss ratio, a 0.67% tax rate, and a $653 median tax; Perry County had 0.32%, 0.53%, and $675; Dyer County had 0.31%, 0.63%, and $1,047. Shelby County's effective tax rate was 0.98% and its median tax was $2,429, while its climate loss ratio was 0.18%. The packet does not provide parcel-level hazard, insurance premium, or deductible data, so these figures cannot substitute for property-specific risk review.

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

Evidence selected for Tennessee

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-0.4%1.9%6.7%Asking-rent change0.3%1.4%6.2%Rent minus price-0.4%
Supply and resale conditionsWhat do permits, inventory, marketing time and price cuts say about pressure?
10th pct.median90th pct.Permits / 1k1.54.39.0Months of supply3.2×4.2×6.0×Days on market47 days63 days86 daysListings with cuts23.6%29.7%32.9%
Employment and household movementDo jobs, household movement and mover income point in the same direction?
10th pct.median90th pct.Job change-0.7%0.2%0.9%Net migration / 1k3.5Net household movement24,542
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 distribution16 scored metros · median 38.0
00–191020–39340–59360–79080–100
County evidence coverageEvery gap stays visible as missing—not estimated
51%48/95Rent100%95/95Climate100%95/95Migration
Highest measured metro gross yieldsscreening metric only · before expenses and financing
Jackson8.3%Union City7.3%Memphis6.9%Kingsport6.6%Cookeville6.2%Johnson City6.2%Lewisburg6.0%
Metro leaderboard

Markets touching Tennessee

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

#MetroScorePriceRentYieldJobs
1Kingsport, TN69$249k$1,3626.6%▲ 1.2%
2Greeneville, TN65$256k$1,1635.5%▲ 0.1%
3Dyersburg, TN64$177k$7405.0%▲ 0.3%
4Sevierville, TN52$410k$1,6985.0%▲ 0.2%
5Athens, TN46$266k$1,1155.0%▲ 0.4%
6Knoxville, TN42$370k$1,7565.7%▲ 0.9%
7Nashville, TN39$458k$1,8104.8%▲ 0.6%
8Tullahoma, TN39$321k$1,4945.6%▲ 0.3%
9Clarksville, TN37$294k$1,3365.5%▲ 0.2%
10Johnson City, TN36$287k$1,4746.2%▼ 0.3%
11Morristown, TN35$304k$1,5156.0%▼ 1.1%
12Jackson, TN34$210k$1,4558.3%▼ 0.2%

Showing the top 12 scored metros of 23. Unscored metros remain discoverable through the national rankings.

Below the metro line

Largest counties in Tennessee

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
Shelby County, TN919,173$222k$1,3897.5%inland flooding
Davidson County, TN715,388$435k$1,8245.0%inland flooding
Knox County, TN494,148$384k$1,7685.5%inland flooding
Hamilton County, TN376,192$358k$1,5285.1%inland flooding
Rutherford County, TN360,646$420k$1,7244.9%inland flooding
Williamson County, TN260,351$931k$2,1772.8%inland flooding
Montgomery County, TN234,153$323k$1,3755.1%inland flooding
Sumner County, TN204,424$448k$1,6694.5%inland flooding
Sullivan County, TN160,624$264k$1,3436.1%inland flooding
Wilson County, TN158,805$508k$1,8804.4%inland flooding
Blount County, TN139,333$399k$1,8685.6%inland flooding
Washington County, TN136,261$313k$1,5475.9%inland flooding
County yield sample48/95counties have the rent needed to compute yield
Statewide net migration+24,542IRS tax-return households summed across counties
Median investor share7.5%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

  1. Rent-growth coverage is incomplete: the measure includes 16 metros and 30 counties, so the reported rent-growth medians do not cover every Tennessee locality.
  2. The rent, price, investor, and yield measures are market- or county-level indicators and do not establish achieved rent, property-level cash flow, or operating expenses.
  3. Positive aggregate migration may not translate evenly across markets because metro job growth ranged from -0.7% to 0.9%.
  4. Resale conditions do not measure rental vacancy or lease-up time; months of supply, days on market, and price cuts are purchase-market indicators.
  5. FEMA leading-hazard labels are county-level and mutually exclusive rather than parcel-level exposure measures, and the packet lacks property-specific insurance pricing.
Investor questions

Before underwriting a property

Are rents keeping up with home prices across the measured market?

Not at the metro median: price growth was 1.9% versus 1.4% rent growth, a supplied rent-minus-price spread of -0.4 percentage points. The counterexample is Sevierville, where rent grew 11.9% while price declined 1.3%.

Does migration provide a dependable statewide demand signal?

It is a positive aggregate signal, with 221,190 movers in, 196,648 out, and net migration of 24,542 across 95 measured counties. It is not sufficient by itself because metro job growth ranged from -0.7% to 0.9%.

Where do entry yield and affordability look strongest in the selected examples?

Jackson had an 8.3% gross yield on a $210,372 price and $1,455 rent; Union City had a 7.3% yield on a $168,371 price and $1,021 rent; Memphis had a 6.9% yield on a $247,919 price and $1,435 rent. Gross yield is not net return.

Where should an investor expect the most purchase competition?

Sevier County had a 37.1% investor share, Shelby County 23.4%, and Haywood County 19.2%, compared with a 7.5% median across 95 counties. These shares indicate purchase activity, not rental performance.

What risk checks cannot be skipped before selecting a property?

County-level screening should account for tax and climate-loss dispersion, then verify parcel-level hazard exposure and insurance. The packet identifies inland flood as the leading label in 79 counties and earthquake in 16, but it does not provide property-specific insurance or deductible data.