Cumberland County

Cumberland County sits at a gross rent-to-price ratio of 6.75%, which places it firmly in appreciation-leaning territory rather than cash-flow country. The median home price of $306,289 against median rent of $1,724 produces a cap rate of 4.39% at current market prices, and the standard leveraged underwrite confirms the story: at 6.85% financing with 20% down, you're looking at a monthly mortgage of $1,606, estimated expenses of $603, and a cash-on-cash return of -8.26%. That's a $485/month hole before any vacancy or capex surprises. Year-over-year appreciation of 0.82% offers little cover for that carry drag. This is not a market where you buy at median and clip coupons; the numbers require either a below-market acquisition, significant value-add upside, or a long-duration hold thesis built on appreciation that hasn't recently materialized.

The cash-flow score of 68 and the negative leveraged return seem contradictory until you notice that the affordability index of 64 and a median price just above $306K leave room to find deals below median where the math improves. An investor buying at, say, 85-90 cents on the dollar through distressed or off-market channels can push the rent-to-price ratio closer to 7.5-8%, at which point the cap rate and debt service begin to find equilibrium at today's rates. For a pure cash-flow buyer expecting to acquire at list price, this market scores poorly. For a value-add operator with a repeatable sourcing channel and the discipline to walk away from full-priced deals, the underlying rent level of $1,724 provides a reasonable ceiling to underwrite toward. An appreciation buyer needs to believe in a re-acceleration from the current 0.82% YoY pace, which the data doesn't currently support.

The stability score of 50 is the number that warrants the most scrutiny. With a population of 61,552, Cumberland is a smaller county, and smaller markets concentrate risk: any single employer departure or demographic shift hits occupancy harder than it would in a metro with diversified demand. No economic anchor data was provided for Cumberland, so the drivers of rental demand, whether retirees, commuters, or a specific employment base, cannot be confirmed from this data set. Investors accustomed to underwriting to a named anchor employer should treat that absence as a prompt to do additional ground-level diligence before committing capital.

The combined tax and insurance load here is actually a moderate tailwind relative to many markets. Tennessee's state-average effective property tax rate of 0.71% produces an annual tax bill of roughly $2,175 on this price point, and insurance runs approximately $1,103 per year, for a combined monthly tax-and-insurance figure of $273. That rate carries a "normal" flag, meaning it neither meaningfully compresses nor inflates your operating cost stack. Bear in mind this is a state-average estimate from the Tax Foundation's 2024 data; actual Cumberland County and township assessments may differ, so verify the local millage rate before finalizing your model. The $273/month is already baked into the $603 estimated expense figure, so it's not additive, but knowing it's not an outlier in either direction lets you benchmark Cumberland against higher-tax alternatives elsewhere.

On concentration risk, a county of 61,552 residents with a stability score of 50 warrants caution about absorption capacity. If you're considering acquiring multiple units, the local rental pool is shallow enough that even modest new supply or a shift in population trends can move effective vacancy meaningfully. No vacancy or regulatory data was provided, so specific rent control or eviction ordinance risk cannot be assessed from this data set alone, but Tennessee's generally landlord-friendly statutory environment is a backdrop worth confirming has not been altered at the municipal level.

Compared to its neighbors, Cumberland is the most expensive market in this peer group at $306,289 median, and it carries the weakest rent-to-price ratio of the counties where that figure is available. Madison County at $222,286 and a 7.48% gross yield, Shelby County at $215,746 and 7.58%, and Haywood County at $167,218 and 7.27% all offer meaningfully better raw yield ratios. Shelby and Madison both score comparably on overall score (61 and 60 respectively versus Cumberland's 60), meaning the risk-adjusted case for paying up into Cumberland isn't evident in these figures. Fayette County's ratio of 6.35% is worse than Cumberland's, making it the only neighbor where Cumberland has a clear yield advantage. An investor choosing Cumberland over Madison or Shelby County needs a specific thesis beyond the headline numbers, whether that's a personal familiarity with the local submarket, a specific value-add pipeline, or a belief that Cumberland's price point will compress toward neighboring levels. Without that differentiated rationale, the neighboring counties present a more accessible entry point with comparable or better gross yield at the current data snapshot.