Dickson County

Dickson County sits at a gross rent-to-price ratio of 0.0594, which translates to a cap rate of 3.86% on a standard underwrite. At a $357,734 median purchase price with $1,770 in monthly rent, the market leans toward the appreciation side of the spectrum rather than cash flow. The model's own numbers confirm this: at 6.85% financing, a 20% down payment produces a monthly mortgage of $1,875, and after adding $620 in estimated expenses, the position runs negative $725 per month, a cash-on-cash return of negative 10.57%. Home price appreciation came in at 1.8% year over year, modest but positive, and the appreciation score of 68 out of 100 is the highest individual score in this county's profile. The overall score of 58 puts Dickson at the 46th percentile nationally and ranks it 35th out of 95 Tennessee counties, a middle-of-the-pack position that accurately reflects the tension between a decent rent level and a purchase price that has run ahead of what income can support at current rates.

The profile here fits an appreciation buyer more cleanly than a cash-flow buyer or value-add operator. Someone underwriting to a five-to-ten-year hold, putting more than 20% down to compress the debt service, or acquiring in an all-cash or low-leverage structure might find the 3.86% cap rate acceptable if they believe the county's price trajectory continues. Cash-flow investors should look elsewhere: the negative $725 monthly figure means you are writing a check every month, and nothing in the data suggests rents are high enough relative to prices to change that arithmetic materially without an exceptional off-market buy well below the $357,734 median. Value-add operators could theoretically force appreciation, but with an affordability index of 53, there is limited headroom to push rents dramatically without tenant turnover pressure, and the stability score of 50 out of 100 does not argue for outsized confidence in occupancy assumptions.

No economic anchor or employer data was provided for Dickson County, so rental demand drivers and job-market depth cannot be assessed from this dataset alone. Investors should independently research the county's employment base before committing, particularly given the stability score of 50, which is the lowest individual score in the profile and warrants scrutiny in the due diligence phase.

On carry costs, the combined monthly tax and insurance load is $319, representing roughly $3,828 annually against a gross rent of $1,770 per month. That $319 figure is already embedded in the $620 estimated expenses line, so it is not an additional surprise, but it is worth isolating: taxes and insurance alone consume 18% of gross monthly rent before mortgage, maintenance, management, or vacancy. The state-average effective property tax rate used here is 0.71%, flagged as normal, and it is a genuine tailwind compared to high-tax states. That said, the data note is explicit that this is a state-average estimate and actual county and township rates in Dickson may differ, so pull the actual assessor data before finalizing your underwrite rather than relying on the 0.71% figure.

The primary risk in this market is the gap between purchase prices and income support. A stability score of 50 in a county of 54,563 people signals concentration risk: a smaller population base means that local economic shocks, employer contractions, or demographic shifts translate into rental demand volatility faster than in larger metro markets. There is no vacancy or crime data in this dataset to quantify those risks further, but the combination of negative cash flow, a middle-tier stability score, and a sub-55,000 population warrants conservative vacancy and credit-loss assumptions in any proforma, not the 5% placeholder that often gets used by default.

Against its neighbors, Dickson occupies an interesting position. Haywood County offers a rent-to-price ratio of 0.0727 at a median price of $167,218, which is meaningfully better on both metrics for a cash-flow buyer. Fayette County is the closest price comp at $366,798 but delivers a higher ratio of 0.0635 and the same overall score of 58, suggesting Fayette squeezes more rent per dollar of purchase price. Sullivan County comes in at $254,306 with a ratio of 0.0568, slightly below Dickson's 0.0594 but at a significantly lower entry point. All five neighbors share an overall score of 56 to 58, so no single county dominates, but the math points toward Fayette County if you want Dickson-level prices with better rent coverage, and toward Haywood County if you want to maximize rent-to-price in Tennessee at a fraction of the capital requirement. Choose Dickson over these alternatives only when you have a specific reason to believe in its local appreciation story, such as proximity to Nashville growth corridors, a development pipeline, or an off-market acquisition below the median.