Marshall County

Marshall County sits at a median home price of $214,960, which lands it on the higher end of what you'd typically find across rural Oklahoma, and the 5.44% year-over-year price appreciation tells you the market has been moving with conviction. The overall score of 75 out of 100, placing Marshall in the 93rd national percentile out of 1,000 counties analyzed, reflects a market that earns its ranking almost entirely on appreciation mechanics rather than cash-flow generation. The cash-flow score registers at zero, which is not an oversight. The data does not support a meaningful cash-flow thesis here at current price levels and a 6.85% financing rate. What this market does offer is an appreciation score of 87 and an affordability index of 84, a combination that tells you prices are still accessible relative to incomes but trending up at a pace that rewards early positioning over yield-chasing.

The investor this market is built for is an appreciation buyer willing to accept thin or neutral monthly returns in exchange for price-growth exposure in a county with a 5.44% annual tailwind. At $214,960 median, you are not overpaying on an absolute basis, and the affordability score of 84 suggests the local buyer pool has not been priced out, which matters for your eventual exit. A cash-flow operator looking to run positive numbers from month one should look elsewhere in the dataset. A value-add buyer might find selective opportunity if they can source below the median, since the appreciation trend gives you a repair-and-hold story, but the zero cash-flow score is a real ceiling until rents catch up with prices. The stability score of 50 is the other number worth sitting with: it signals meaningful volatility in either demand, employment, or price cycles, and that cuts against the pure hold-and-collect strategy even if you accept the thin yield.

The carry cost picture on a $214,960 purchase is workable but needs to be modeled explicitly. Oklahoma's state-average effective property tax rate of 0.90% and an insurance rate of 0.72% combine to a monthly tax-and-insurance obligation of $290, according to Tax Foundation 2024 data. That is not a small number on a rental with unclear rent assumptions, and the caveat in the data applies here: the 0.90% is a state-average estimate, and your actual bill will depend on the specific county and township rate, which may differ. The tax flag is "normal," so this is not a situation like you'd find in Illinois or New Jersey where the rate alone can flip a deal from borderline to unfeasible, but $290 per month in fixed carry before you get to mortgage, maintenance, or vacancy is a number that needs its own line on the model, especially when cash-flow score is zero and the rent level is not provided in the data.

Population of 15,494 puts Marshall firmly in small-county territory, and the stability score of 50 reflects that concentration risk is real. A county this size with a single large employer or a dominant sector can swing hard in either direction when that anchor shifts. No economic anchors are provided in the data, so no specific employers or industries can be cited, but the stability score alone should prompt due diligence into what is actually driving residential demand. If the answer is Lake Texoma tourism, retirement migration, or a single industrial employer, your underwriting should stress-test for disruption to that driver. Small populations also mean thinner rental markets with less liquidity on the tenant side, which extends vacancy when units turn over and limits your ability to push rents without losing occupancy.

Compared to its neighbors, Marshall's $214,960 median is the highest in the peer group. Woodward County sits at $133,590 with an overall score of 77, beating Marshall's 75 at a price point nearly $81,000 lower. Comanche County prices at $150,944 with a rent-to-price ratio of 0.0837 and an overall score of 76, both metrics pointing to meaningfully better cash-flow mechanics than Marshall offers. Texas County at $162,139 and Comanche both score comparably to Marshall on the overall index while coming in 25-30% cheaper on acquisition cost. If cash flow or capital efficiency is your primary objective, the neighbor data suggests Comanche or Woodward likely underwrite cleaner. The case for choosing Marshall over these alternatives is specifically that 87 appreciation score and the 5.44% YoY price movement: if you believe that trend has legs and you are building a portfolio around equity accumulation rather than monthly distributions, Marshall's positioning at the top of its peer group on appreciation makes it the right pick. If you need the deal to carry itself operationally, the neighbors win.