Stutsman County

Stutsman County posts a gross rent-to-price ratio of 5.74%, which lands it squarely in appreciation-leaning territory rather than the cash-flow sweet spot most buy-and-hold operators are hunting. The cap rate of 3.73% confirms that framing: you are buying a median-priced asset at $233,456, collecting $1,117 per month in rent, and the unlevered return is thin. Run the standard 20% down scenario at 6.85% and the math gets uncomfortable fast. Monthly mortgage sits at $1,224, operating expenses add another $391, and the model spits out negative $497 in monthly cash flow, which translates to a cash-on-cash return of negative 11.11%. That is not a rounding error or a minor shortfall; it is a material carry deficit that demands either a meaningfully below-list acquisition, additional rent from a second unit, or a clear conviction play on the appreciation side. The 8.18% year-over-year home price growth gives that appreciation case some substance. A score of 85 out of 100 on the appreciation dimension is the highest signal in this county's profile, and the overall score of 66 with a national rank of 233 out of 1,000 (70th percentile) suggests the market is legitimate without being elite.

The investor profile this market suits most cleanly is someone willing to absorb short-term carry losses in exchange for continued price appreciation, or a value-add operator who can acquire materially below the $233,456 median and reposition to a rent level that closes the gap. A pure cash-flow buyer should look elsewhere. At the current rent-to-price ratio, you would need either rents substantially above the $1,117 median or a purchase price somewhere in the $170,000 to $185,000 range to reach breakeven before debt service, and neither condition is available at median. The affordability index of 80 and the relatively modest median price do suggest a market where a disciplined buyer can find off-market or distressed inventory below median, which is where a value-add thesis becomes executable. The stability score of 50, however, is a caution flag: this is a small market of 21,609 people, and thin liquidity cuts both ways.

The $259 per month in combined property tax and insurance deserves a line in your underwrite. At a 0.98% state-average effective tax rate, North Dakota sits in a normal range, so this is not a flag the way a 1.7% or 2.0% rate would be. That said, the note from the Tax Foundation data is worth heeding: the 0.98% figure is a state-average estimate, and actual county or township rates in Stutsman can differ, sometimes meaningfully. Budget the $259 as a floor, verify the township rate before closing, and do not assume the state average applies exactly to your parcel. Insurance at 0.35% is manageable, though North Dakota's weather profile means hail and wind coverage should be reviewed carefully in any policy you underwrite.

The principal concentration risk here is population size. At 21,609 residents, Stutsman is a single-employer or single-sector shock away from a demand cliff. If the county's primary economic engine softens, vacancy could move faster and recover more slowly than in a market with a diversified base of 100,000 or more. That dynamic also limits your exit: the buyer pool for income properties in a county this size is thinner, which compresses multiples and extends hold times if you need to sell into a soft period. None of that makes Stutsman uninvestable, but it does mean position sizing and hold period planning matter more here than they would in a larger metro.

Against its neighbors, Stutsman presents an interesting trade-off. Traill County (overall score 64, median $208,675) and Bottineau County (score 63, median $192,527) are cheaper to enter but score lower overall. Renville County at $174,923 is the most affordable in this peer group and also scores 64. On the other end, Dunn County (score 69, median $344,716) edges Stutsman on the overall score but costs $111,000 more at the median, and Williams County (score 63, median $333,032, rent-to-price 4.91%) is both more expensive and posts a worse rent-to-price ratio than Stutsman's 5.74%. That comparison is telling: Williams carries a higher price point and a lower yield, which makes Stutsman the more defensible choice for anyone prioritizing the appreciation thesis without overpaying on the entry multiple. Choose Stutsman over its neighbors when the 8.18% price growth trend and the 70th-percentile national ranking justify the carry cost, and when you have the underwriting discipline to account for a thin liquidity environment and small-market concentration risk.