Morgan County

Morgan County sits at a median home price of $749,951 with a cap rate of zero and a cash-on-cash return of zero, which tells you everything you need to know about where it sits on the spectrum: this is an appreciation play, not a cash-flow market. The data provides no rent estimate, which itself signals how thin the rental market is in a county of 12,367 people. The appreciation score of 64 is the one number working in an investor's favor here, and home prices did tick up 1.36% year-over-year, a modest but positive real gain. The affordability index of 9 out of 100 reflects how stretched purchase prices are relative to income, and the overall score of 43 out of 100 places Morgan in the 8th national percentile, ranking 22nd out of 28 Utah counties surveyed. Those are not numbers that invite aggressive deployment of capital.

The only investor this market suits is one buying for long-term appreciation, not rental income. With a cash-flow score of zero and no meaningful rent-to-price data to underwrite, anyone expecting monthly cash flow from a $750,000 acquisition at 6.85% financing will be disappointed. A 20% down payment of $149,990 still leaves a large mortgage servicing obligation, and with no rents provided to offset it, carry costs run entirely on the investor's balance sheet. A value-add operator looking for distressed assets to reposition has limited runway in a thinly populated rural county, where comparable sales and rental comps are sparse and exit liquidity is narrow. The appreciation buyer with a long time horizon, low leverage needs, and tolerance for illiquidity is the only profile that fits.

No economic anchors or employer data were provided for Morgan County, so the local demand drivers for rental housing cannot be evaluated from this dataset. What is observable is population: 12,367 residents is a small base, and thin population translates directly to thin rental demand, limited tenant depth, and concentrated vacancy risk if one or two tenants turn. Investors used to markets with large renter pools should treat that small population figure as a structural constraint, not a temporary condition.

On carrying costs, the monthly tax and insurance figure comes to $513, reflecting an annualized property tax of $4,725 at a state-average effective rate of 0.63% and annual insurance of $1,425. Utah's 0.63% rate is flagged as low, and that is a genuine tailwind on an otherwise expensive asset: at a competing state's 1.5% rate, annual taxes on a $750,000 property would exceed $11,000, so the lower Utah rate does meaningfully reduce the monthly carry burden. That said, this is a state-average estimate per Tax Foundation 2024 data, and actual county and township rates in Morgan may differ. Pull the county assessor's current mill levy before finalizing any underwrite.

The concentration risk here is real and data-supported. A county with a population under 13,000 creates a single-point-of-failure dynamic for any rental portfolio: a small number of tenants, a small buyer pool at exit, and limited comparables to defend an appraisal. No vacancy or crime data are provided, so this analysis will not speculate on those dimensions, but the structural exposure from market thinness is already clear from the population figure alone.

Comparing Morgan to its neighbors reinforces the difficulty of the investment case. Salt Lake County prices at $558,754 with a rent-to-price ratio of 0.0345 and an overall score of 45, strictly better than Morgan on both affordability and income generation. Cache County is the most compelling alternative in the dataset: median price of $454,811, rent-to-price ratio of 0.0395, and the highest overall score in the peer group at 48. Washington County sits at $522,143 with the strongest rent-to-price ratio of the group at 0.0434, meaning a buyer who wants income yield has two materially superior options within the same state. Summit County at $1.28 million is the only market more expensive than Morgan, and it carries a lower overall score of 38. Choose Morgan over its neighbors only if your thesis is specifically tied to the geography, such as proximity to outdoor recreation demand or a long-hold land position, and even then, the numbers do not make a compelling rental investment case on their own.