Alamance County

Alamance County posts a gross rent-to-price ratio of 5.52%, which translates to a cap rate of 3.59% once operating expenses are factored in. At a 6.85% financing rate, the modeled investment, a $290,921 purchase with 20% down, produces negative $655 per month in cash flow and a cash-on-cash return of -11.75%. Those numbers place Alamance squarely in the appreciation-leaning half of the spectrum, where the bet is on price growth rather than income today. The problem is that price growth isn't delivering much either: home values rose just 0.99% year-over-year. An affordability index of 68 and a median price just under $291,000 suggest the market isn't wildly overpriced, but at current rates the income simply doesn't cover the carry, and price momentum isn't strong enough to paper over that gap on its own. The overall score of 57 out of 100, landing at the 42nd percentile nationally and 32nd out of 100 North Carolina counties, reflects a market that is average in most dimensions without being clearly excellent in any.

The negative cash flow at full leverage rules this market out for a pure cash-flow buyer unless they're buying significantly below asking or bringing more equity to the table to cut the monthly mortgage. At a 3.59% cap rate the property won't pencil for a cash flow operator even with an all-cash purchase at most institutional thresholds. The appreciation score of 60, modestly above the cash-flow score of 53, suggests the county leans slightly toward the growth side of the ledger, but with sub-1% annual price appreciation in the most recent period that thesis needs a longer runway than recent data supports. Where Alamance could make sense is for a value-add operator who can acquire below the $291,000 median, force appreciation through renovation, and refinance at a lower effective cost basis, or for an investor with a longer hold horizon who's willing to carry modest losses now against what they believe will be stronger appreciation once the rate environment shifts.

The taxInsurance composite runs $272 per month, split between an estimated $204 in property taxes and $68 in insurance. At a state-average effective property tax rate of 0.84%, the rate is in the normal range and doesn't demand special attention on the underwrite the way a high-tax state would. That said, the note accompanying the data is worth taking seriously: 0.84% is a state-average estimate from Tax Foundation 2024 data, and actual county and township rates in Alamance will differ, so pulling the current Alamance County rate schedule before closing is the right move. Insurance at 0.28% of value annually is consistent with inland Piedmont exposure, well away from coastal wind risk. Combined, the $272 monthly tax-and-insurance load is material but not extreme on a $291,000 asset.

The most concrete risk in Alamance is the stability score of 50, the lowest of the five scored dimensions. That number warrants scrutiny before committing capital. Without vacancy or specific economic concentration data provided in the inputs, the specific driver of that score can't be pinpointed here, but any underwrite should stress-test for a period of higher vacancy or softening rents given the county's below-median stability reading. The affordability index of 68 provides some cushion against dramatic price declines, and the population of roughly 172,000 gives the rental pool a reasonable base, but an investor should independently verify tenant demand depth before assuming rents hold at $1,339.

Comparison to the neighboring counties is instructive. Rockingham County to the north prices at $189,398 with rents of $1,084 and a gross rent-to-price ratio of 6.87%, meaningfully better than Alamance's 5.52%. Nash County, at $229,278 with rents of $1,305 and a ratio of 6.83%, is similarly more favorable on the income yield side. Both Rockingham and Nash carry the same or nearly the same overall score as Alamance (57 and 58, respectively), so the trade-off isn't quality for yield: you're getting comparable overall scores at lower price points and better rent yields. Lincoln County goes the other direction, with a median price of $396,190 and a gross ratio of 5.12%, making it more expensive and lower-yielding than Alamance, presumably pricing in stronger appreciation potential. The case for choosing Alamance over Rockingham or Nash comes down to whether local economic factors, specific sub-market access, or property availability justify paying more for roughly the same quality of market and accepting a lower rent yield. On the numbers alone as presented, Rockingham and Nash look like the stronger cash-flow options at comparable risk, and Alamance makes more sense only if an investor has specific local knowledge, a defined value-add pipeline, or a conviction on Piedmont triad spillover demand that isn't yet visible in the year-over-year price data.