ZIP 38135 begins with a cross-market tension rather than a single rent conclusion. In June Zillow’s reading, the typical observed asking-rent index, the Zillow Observed Rent Index (ZORI), was $1,815, up 5.37% from the same month a year earlier. The direct Redfin ZIP resale observation reported only 0.66% annual median sold-price growth. The five-digit label is both a Zillow ZIP market identifier and a match to a Census ZCTA. A ZCTA is a statistical area, not the same thing as a USPS delivery ZIP. Those matching labels permit comparison but do not merge source universes: ZORI is blended across rental types in an asking-rent index, while Redfin records for-sale activity. The difference is descriptive and does not establish that either market causes the other.
The rent-history evidence supports an accelerating label, but only as a backward-looking measurement. Exact same-month annualized ZORI changes were 5.37% over one year, 2.58% over three years, and 4.45% over five years. The latest pace therefore confirms the longer positive path while exceeding both longer-period rates; it does not break from that history. Annualized monthly-return variability was 3.05%, and the maximum drawdown was 2.70%, showing that the path has not been uniformly smooth. Coverage was 99.17% across 120 observations and 118 consecutive returns. Transparent national discovery ranks were 703 for momentum, 1,717 for stability, and 894 for the balanced measure, with lower ranks higher. Near-complete coverage supports the historical description, while observed variability tempers confidence placed in one current rent snapshot. None of these measurements is a forecast or investment recommendation.
Bedroom figures provide a sizing bridge, not observed local bedroom-rent comps. The modelled monthly ZIP estimates are $1,506 for a studio, $1,645 for one bedroom, $1,815 for two bedrooms, $2,393 for three bedrooms, and $2,792 for four bedrooms. These are modelled estimates scaled from ZIP ZORI through the local HUD bedroom ladder; they are never measured bedroom rents. The local HUD two-bedroom standard is $1,820, illustrating the administrative reference used in the scaling rather than a listing-level rent observation. HUD FMR/SAFMR is a bedroom-specific administrative standard, not asking rent. Accordingly, the apparent match between the two-bedroom estimate and the ZIP index is a result of the model structure, not independent confirmation of a measured two-bedroom market rent.
A separate ACS lens describes occupied renter homes rather than advertised inventory. The matched Census ZCTA’s ACS 2024 five-year survey reports median gross rent of $1,702 with a $160 margin of error; gross rent includes selected utilities and is not equivalent to Zillow’s asking-rent index. The ZCTA median household income was $97,282. Annualizing the current asking-rent index produces a required gross income of $72,600 under the 30% screen. That screen is arithmetic only, not advice or an applicant qualification rule. ACS also reports 842 of 2,014 renter homes, or 41.81%, in the 30%-or-more rent-burden category, with a count margin of error of $280. This survey burden estimate cannot demonstrate the circumstances of a current household, lease, or specific rental unit.
Housing-stock evidence also remains in the ACS ZCTA universe. Of 11,068 housing units, the stock is predominantly single-family. The survey reports 218 vacant units, equal to an overall vacancy rate of 1.97%. Renter-occupied homes represented 18.56% of occupied units, and 76 vacant units were classified as for rent. These figures describe housing and tenure composition in a multi-year survey, rather than a current set of actively marketed rentals. In particular, a vacancy count does not prove that a particular property is available, establish its condition, or set its asking rent. The low reported overall vacancy rate and the small for-rent vacancy count should therefore be read as aggregate stock measures with survey timing and classification limits, not as unit-level availability evidence.
Wider comparisons place the direct ZIP signal in context without replacing it. In the wider City of Bartlett context, the rent figure is about $1,938.34; in the wider Shelby County context it is $1,389; and in the wider Memphis, TN-MS-AR metro context it is $1,435. At those respective scopes, the ZIP asking-rent index sits below the city figure but above the county and metro figures. City, county, and metro values are context only, not substitutes for direct ZIP evidence or rental comps. They also cannot reconcile the different populations and measurement methods behind asking-rent indexes, ACS occupied-home gross rent, and HUD administrative standards. The comparison is useful for scale, but it does not identify the rent appropriate to any address or bedroom configuration.
Redfin’s direct rolling-three-month ZIP resale observation supplies a separate view of for-sale liquidity. Median sold price was $307,516, with the 0.66% annual price change noted above. There were 89 homes sold, median marketing time was 23 days, reported inventory was 74 homes, and months of supply was 2.5. The average sale-to-list ratio was 98.29%, while 24.16% of sales closed above list price. These are for-sale market signals, not rental transactions or property operating results. Annualized ZIP ZORI divided by median sold price equals a 7.08% cross-source screening ratio only; it is not a cap rate, net return, expected return, or property yield. The much slower resale-price change challenges any reading that the rent-history acceleration is being mirrored by resale appreciation, while the observed sales and marketing data document turnover without resolving that gap.
Source boundaries define the practical limits of this ZIP report. ZORI cannot identify a unit’s current quoted rent, ACS cannot date a specific tenant or listing, HUD does not price individual advertisements, and Redfin does not provide rental transactions or property-level economics. For a specific property, the missing facts to check include the exact bedroom count, advertised monthly rent, included utilities, lease term, concessions, listing date, address geography, list price, final sale price, and actual market exposure. The packet also contains no property-specific expense, financing, condition, or transaction-detail evidence. Those checks would determine whether the ZIP-level signals fit the particular unit or sale under review. Which property-level facts would show whether these aggregate measures apply to the specific address?