Bates County

Bates County lands at the 86th national percentile overall (rank 113 of 1,000 counties scored), with an appreciation score of 81 and 3.34% year-over-year home price growth on a median of $231,215. The cash flow score, however, is zero, and cap rate and cash-on-cash figures are not available in the current data set, which itself tells you something about how thin the income-side numbers run here. The affordability index of 80 and a purchase price well under $250,000 keep entry costs manageable, but without a rent-to-price ratio on record for Bates, investors cannot yet confirm whether gross yields clear the bar for debt service at a 6.85% rate on a 20% down conventional loan. That gap in the data is the first thing any serious underwriter should close before committing capital.

This market fits an appreciation buyer more than a cash-flow buyer, and the numbers make that case plainly. The 81 appreciation score and 3.34% annual price growth put Bates in a category where equity accumulation is the primary return driver, not monthly income. A cash-flow-focused operator looking to replace W-2 income with rental checks is misaligned with what this county currently offers, at least at these price points. The 80 affordability score does open a lane for value-add buyers who can acquire at or below median, force appreciation through renovation, and reposition the asset at a higher rent, but that thesis depends on local rent upside that the data does not yet confirm. The stability score of 50 is the other number worth sitting with: it signals meaningful volatility or demand uncertainty, which raises the bar for value-add execution where the investor needs tenants to show up on schedule.

Economic anchor data is not provided for Bates County, so employer concentration and job-base quality cannot be assessed from this data set. With a county population of 16,101, Bates is a small rural market by any measure, and that scale is itself an economic context worth pricing in. Thin labor markets can mean limited rental demand pools, slower lease-up after vacancies, and greater sensitivity to the loss of any single large employer or agricultural cycle shift. Investors accustomed to metro submarkets should underwrite longer vacancy periods and lower the confidence interval on rent growth projections until they have boots-on-the-ground data on the local tenant base.

On carry costs, the combined monthly tax and insurance burden runs approximately $272 at a 0.97% state-average effective property tax rate and a 0.44% insurance rate, per Tax Foundation 2024 estimates. The tax flag is normal, meaning the rate does not represent an unusual headwind or tailwind relative to the national distribution, and at under $300 per month combined, the carry is not the thing that breaks the deal. That said, the standard caveat applies: the 0.97% figure is a Missouri state-average estimate, and actual county and township rates in Bates can differ materially, so pull the assessor data for any specific parcel before finalizing your pro forma. Insurance at 0.44% annualizes to roughly $1,017 on this price point, which is reasonable but worth confirming given Missouri's exposure to severe weather events that can push premiums higher on older rural housing stock.

The primary risk in Bates is concentration, specifically the combination of a small population base, an absent cash flow score, and a stability score sitting at the midpoint. A 16,000-person county does not generate the tenant depth that insulates a portfolio from vacancy swings, and a stability score of 50 means the model sees meaningful downside scenarios. Regulatory risk is not flagged in the data and demographic trends are not supplied, so those dimensions cannot be scored here. What can be said is that rural Missouri counties of this size tend to face long-term demographic headwinds from outmigration to larger metro areas, and investors should verify whether Bates is gaining or losing working-age population before projecting rent growth.

Comparing neighbors sharpens the picture considerably. Butler County comes in at a $160,556 median with a rent-to-price ratio of 6.73% and an overall score of 70, which means it trades at a 30% discount to Bates and produces a measurably higher gross yield. Saint Louis City offers the highest rent-to-price ratio in the comparison set at 8.79% on a $175,441 median, also scoring 70 overall. Both of those counties are better positioned for cash-flow buyers than Bates is. Andrew County and Clinton County carry higher medians ($281,483 and $275,256 respectively) and slightly better overall scores (73 and 70), with no rent data provided, making them appreciation plays at a higher buy-in. Maries County is nearly price-equivalent to Bates at $233,679 with the same overall score of 70. The case for choosing Bates over its neighbors comes down to one thing: if you believe the 81 appreciation score reflects a genuine relative price-growth edge and you are buying for long-term equity build rather than yield, Bates earns its place. If income is the objective, Butler County or Saint Louis City deserve the first look.