Wilson County

Wilson County posts a gross rent-to-price ratio of 8.3%, which puts it squarely in cash-flow territory by most buy-and-hold benchmarks. The median home comes in at $216,195 with a median rent of $1,497, and the market-level cap rate lands at 5.4%. That cap rate is workable but not exceptional, and the model underwrite makes the limits clear: at 6.85% financing with 20% down, monthly mortgage sits at $1,133, estimated expenses add $524, and the resulting cash flow is negative $161 per month on a cash-on-cash return of -3.89%. The gross yield is attractive; the debt load at current rates is what compresses the return. Home price appreciation is effectively flat, down 0.4% year over year, so you are not getting paid to wait on the equity side either. The affordability index of 84 signals the market is meaningfully cheaper than the national benchmark, which keeps the tenant pool broad and supports occupancy, but it also signals limited organic price appreciation pressure.

Wilson's 8.3% gross yield is the number that draws investors here, and it belongs in the hands of two types of buyer: a cash or low-leverage operator who can bend the debt service math into positive territory, and a value-add buyer who can push rents above the $1,497 median. The cash-flow score of 83 out of 100 confirms the gross income potential is real. The appreciation score of 48 tells you this is not an equity play. An appreciation-focused buyer should look elsewhere; the -0.4% price change and mid-tier stability score of 50 do not support a thesis built on price compounding. For the cash buyer, the $216,195 median entry is accessible, and removing the $1,133 mortgage payment from the expense stack converts this underwrite from slightly negative to meaningfully positive operating income. For the value-add operator, getting rents from $1,497 to $1,600 or above on renovated product narrows the cash-flow gap substantially even with leverage in place.

The economic context data was not provided for Wilson County, so employer-level demand drivers are outside the scope of this analysis. What the population figure of 78,667 does tell you is that this is a small to mid-size county market, which carries the usual concentration considerations: a single large employer exit or a regional economic contraction will move vacancy in ways that a larger metro absorbs more gradually.

The combined monthly tax and insurance figure of $202 is already baked into the $524 estimated expenses figure, so it is not an additional surprise, but it is worth understanding the components. The state-average effective property tax rate used here is 0.84%, classified as normal, which is neither a headwind nor a tailwind worth emphasizing. The insurance rate of 0.28% is on the lower end. Keep in mind that the 0.84% figure is a state-average estimate from Tax Foundation 2024 data, and actual Wilson County or township-level rates may differ from that baseline, so verify the county assessor's rate before finalizing any underwrite.

The primary risk in Wilson is concentration and scale. A county of 78,667 people with a flat price trend and a stability score of 50 has limited margin for a demand shock. Regulatory and demographic risks are not supported by the data provided, so they are not addressed here. The flat appreciation signal and below-average stability score together suggest this is a market where getting the individual asset right matters more than riding a macro tailwind, because the macro tailwind is not present.

Among the neighbors provided, Wilson is the most affordable entry point at $216,195, and it carries the highest gross rent-to-price ratio at 8.3%. Davidson County prices at $264,061 with a 6.6% gross yield and an overall score of 65, one point below Wilson's 66, meaning you pay more for a lower yield and roughly equivalent quality signal. Cumberland County at $227,591 and a 7.5% yield is the closest comparison: slightly higher price, lower yield, lower overall score of 61. Cherokee County's 7.1% yield at $274,117 and a 62 score is a worse deal on both dimensions. Perquimans and Surry lack rent data in the provided figures, making a direct yield comparison impossible. The case for choosing Wilson over its neighbors is straightforward on the numbers: lowest price, highest yield, highest overall score among those with complete data. The case against Wilson is equally clear: if you are underwriting an appreciation story or need a large, diversified tenant market to reduce concentration risk, Cumberland County's slightly larger economic footprint or Davidson's higher price point may reflect better long-run demand stability even at a lower yield.