At $1,163 in June 2026, 65802’s ZIP-level Zillow Observed Rent Index (ZORI), a typical observed asking-rent index blended across rental types, puts current rent beneath nearby wider-geography context. It is an index of typical observed asking rents, not a quote for a particular vacant home or a distribution of every listing price. The five-digit label is both a Zillow ZIP market identifier and a matched Census ZCTA; a ZCTA is a statistical area and is not identical to a USPS delivery ZIP. For wider context, the Springfield city asking-rent context is $1,230, the Greene County asking-rent context is $1,264, and the Springfield, MO metro asking-rent context is $1,268; all exceed the ZIP index. Those city, county, and metro measures are context only, not replacement values for this ZIP. The lower ZIP reading is the initial signal, while the scope differences set firm limits on how far that comparison can go.
Source choice creates the report’s largest price tension. In the matched ZCTA, the ACS 2024 five-year median gross rent is $944. This is a survey measure of occupied renter homes that includes selected utilities, whereas ZORI is a current asking-rent index. The index is 23.20% above that median, but the gap is not a like-for-like listing comparison; the survey’s published margin of error also reflects sampling uncertainty. In a third universe, the FY2026 local HUD FMR/SAFMR two-bedroom standard is $1,095. It is an administrative, bedroom-specific standard, not asking rent or evidence of a listed unit’s contract price. Timing, occupancy, utility treatment, and bedroom treatment differ, so the measures answer separate questions and should not be averaged, substituted for one another, or treated as conflicting readings of one rent.
The local HUD ladder is used to scale ZIP ZORI, producing modelled monthly ZIP estimates rather than observed size-specific rents: $931 for a studio, $938 for one bedroom, $1,163 for two bedrooms, $1,591 for three bedrooms, and $1,807 for four bedrooms. These are modelled estimates, never measured bedroom rents. The middle value aligns with the overall index because that is the scaling anchor; the other values inherit local HUD bedroom relationships. They can compare the implied size ladder inside this ZIP framework and show how the model’s relationship changes with bedroom count. They do not show actual asking rent, condition, lease terms, location within the geography, or utility charges for any listed apartment or house. HUD informs the calculation without becoming a market observation.
Income and burden evidence create a separate affordability lens, with a different population from ZORI listings. The matched ZCTA’s ACS median household income is $55,019, and annualizing the current index puts asking rent at 25.37% of that median income. Geographic household income is not the verified income of a prospective renter. A 30% screen applied to the index produces required annual income of $46,520. That screen is arithmetic only: it is not advice, an applicant qualification rule, or evidence of what an owner will accept. ACS also reports 3,355 of 7,831 renter households with gross rent burdens at or above 30%, or 42.84%. This survey result describes occupied renters rather than an available home, so it cannot prove a particular household’s burden or a particular unit’s affordability. ACS estimates carry reported sampling margins of error, which warrants care in broad interpretation.
Stock data supplies scale but not an availability verdict. Of 20,493 housing units, 18,918 are occupied and 1,575 are vacant, for a 7.69% vacancy rate. The rate uses all housing units as its denominator and should not be read as a count of currently advertised rentals. The stock includes 16,289 single-family units and 1,124 units in large multifamily structures, indicating that both structure categories are present in the measured inventory. These are housing counts, not a real-time listing feed. Vacancy may include units unavailable to ordinary renters for reasons the packet does not specify, and it cannot prove whether a particular home is offered, what it costs, or its condition. Read alongside the survey burden result, the stock measures describe aggregate composition and occupancy rather than the terms or status of an individual property.
Looking backward, the index rose 3.23% on the exact same-month one-year comparison, versus annualized gains of 5.12% across three years and 6.09% across five years. Recent direction remains upward, but its pace is slower than both longer windows, so it confirms the broader direction while breaking from its earlier average speed. Annualized monthly-return variability is 3.24%, and maximum drawdown is 4.09%; these measurements limit the confidence a reader should place in a single current rent snapshot as a precise or permanent level. History coverage is 99.28%, supporting continuity of the record, but it does not eliminate composition, revision, or index limitations. Transparent national discovery ranks are 601 for momentum, 1,971 for stability, and 966 for balanced history among history-eligible ZIPs, where lower rank is higher. These are backward-looking measurements, not forecasts or investment recommendations.
Interpretation should stop at what each measure can support. The Zillow index can orient a current asking-rent comparison, the ACS survey can describe occupied households’ reported gross-rent conditions, and HUD can provide a standardized bedroom ladder, but none identifies the terms of an actual offering. Concrete property-level checks include advertised asking rent, exact bedroom and bathroom count, utility responsibilities, lease length, renewal terms, deposits, recurring fees, concessions, occupancy date, furnishing status, and whether the address is assigned to the market geography used here. The listing’s advertised bedroom count should be checked against the relevant modelled estimate rather than assumed to match it. Included utilities should be separated from base rent before comparing a listing with ACS gross rent. Confirm current availability directly, because neither vacancy nor burden data proves it. Does the specific property’s documented rent and contract structure make the desired comparison meaningful?