Marshall County

Marshall County sits at a $202,183 median home price with a 5.2% year-over-year price decline, an affordability index of 87, and cap rate and cash-flow figures that the data shows as zero, meaning the current rent-to-price relationship does not pencil to positive returns at standard financing terms with a 6.85% interest rate and 20% down. That combination, a depreciating asset that does not cash flow, is the central tension any investor has to resolve before committing capital here. The overall score of 47 out of 100, a cash-flow score of 0, and an appreciation score of 15 place this county squarely in the lower tier of buy-and-hold markets nationally, ranking 652nd out of 1,000 counties evaluated and landing in the 17th percentile nationally and 92nd out of 120 Kentucky counties.

Given those numbers, Marshall County as currently priced does not suit a cash-flow buyer running conventional financing. The cash-flow score of 0 and zeroed-out cash-on-cash return confirm that the debt service at 6.85% is consuming the spread between rent and operating costs. An appreciation buyer has little to work with either: a 15 appreciation score and a 5.2% trailing price drop argue against a thesis built on equity accumulation in the near term. The investor with the clearest path to a return here is the value-add operator who can acquire below the $202,183 median, force equity through renovation, and either refinance or sell before the hold period eats into returns, or one who can pay enough cash or negotiate enough seller concessions to compress the effective purchase price until the rent-to-cost ratio generates real yield. The stability score of 50 suggests the market is neither collapsing nor accelerating, which gives a patient, disciplined buyer some runway to execute a repositioning strategy, but there is no margin for error on a financed deal at current prices.

No economic anchor or employer data was provided for Marshall County, so that dimension of the demand picture is not something this analysis can speak to with specificity.

The combined monthly tax and insurance burden on a median-priced asset here runs $201, with the property tax component based on Kentucky's state-average effective rate of 0.86% and the insurance component at 0.33%. The 0.86% rate sits in the normal range and is not a meaningful drag relative to higher-tax states, though the standard caveat applies: this is a state-average estimate from Tax Foundation 2024, and your specific county or township rate may differ from what appears in your underwrite. At $201 per month, taxes and insurance consume a real slice of any gross rent figure, and on a deal that is already showing zero cash flow before those costs are layered in, every line item matters. Verify the actual county assessor rate before finalizing numbers.

The primary risks visible in this data are price momentum and financing sensitivity. A 5.2% annual price decline on a $202,183 asset represents roughly $10,500 in lost equity over twelve months at the median, which offsets any rent collection in a financed scenario. Marshall's population of 31,706 also signals a small market where rental demand is concentrated and vacancy exposure per property is higher than in larger metros, though actual vacancy figures are not provided here. Regulatory and concentration risks specific to Marshall County are not addressable from the data provided.

The five neighboring counties all trade at meaningfully lower prices: Crittenden at $119,603, Muhlenberg at $132,697, Estill at $124,506, Jackson at $113,729, and Whitley at $148,725. Every one of those neighbors carries a lower overall score than or equal to Marshall's 47, which means the trade-off for the cheaper entry point is not a better-scoring market, just a cheaper one. If the investor's thesis is cash flow through a lower acquisition cost, Crittenden at 48 overall and $119,603 median, or Whitley at 47 overall and $148,725, may offer better rent-to-price ratios worth underwriting. Marshall makes more sense than its neighbors only if there is a specific local advantage, a particular asset quality, a Lake Barkley-adjacent tourism demand driver, or a value-add acquisition well below the county median, that the county-level data cannot capture. On pure numbers, none of these five counties represent a high-conviction buy-and-hold environment, and Marshall at the highest price point among them requires the clearest justification.