Marquette County

Marquette County sits at a median home price of $271,265 with 6.18% year-over-year appreciation, which is the headline number that explains everything else about this market. The appreciation score of 90 out of 100 is the dominant signal. Cash flow scores zero, which tells you that at current prices and a 6.85% rate, the rent-to-price relationship does not generate meaningful monthly surplus, and likely runs negative after carrying costs. This is not a mystery: at $271,265, a conventional purchase with 20% down ($54,253) carries a mortgage rate environment that is punishing for thin-margin rentals. There is no cap rate figure in the data, which itself reflects the reality that buyers here are pricing in future appreciation more than current income. This county sits firmly on the appreciation end of the cash-flow-versus-appreciation spectrum, with almost no ambiguity.

The investor this market suits is someone comfortable accepting neutral to negative monthly cash flow in exchange for a bet on continued price growth. The 6.18% YoY price gain is real and material, and an affordability index of 72 suggests the market is not yet priced into the stratosphere, leaving some runway. What it does not suit is the cash-flow buyer running a leveraged portfolio who needs each property to carry itself. With a cash-on-cash return of zero in the data, a buy-and-hold investor deploying debt here needs either a substantial down payment to suppress the mortgage payment, a below-market acquisition, or a value-add angle that lifts rents above what the current median supports. A value-add operator who can force appreciation through renovation and reposition a property at the upper end of local rents has a more defensible path than a straight-purchase landlord at list price.

No economic anchor data was provided for Marquette County, so a detailed employer-by-employer breakdown is not possible here. What the demographic and population figures do tell you is that this is a county of roughly 15,600 people, which is a small, rural market. Small population bases concentrate risk: a single large employer contraction, a broader rural outmigration trend, or a softening in whatever demand is driving the appreciation score can move the needle meaningfully on both vacancy and price. Rental demand in markets this size is often thinner and less diversified than in metro-adjacent counties, and underwriting should reflect that.

The tax and insurance carry deserves direct attention. At a state-average effective property tax rate of 1.85%, Wisconsin's rate is high enough to deserve its own line on your underwrite, and the data flags it accordingly. On a $271,265 purchase, that translates to roughly $5,018 in annual property tax and $624 in annual insurance, combining to $470 per month before you touch principal, interest, maintenance, or vacancy. That $470 is not a rounding error; on a property where cash flow is already at zero, it is the single largest non-mortgage line item and the most reliable one. The caveat the data itself carries is worth repeating: 1.85% is a state-average estimate from Tax Foundation 2024 figures, and actual county and township rates in Marquette may differ, so pull the county assessor's levy data before finalizing any underwrite.

The concentration risk in a 15,600-person rural county is the sharpest structural concern this data supports. Small rental pools mean individual property performance diverges widely from county-level medians, and a prolonged vacancy in a rural market is harder to fill than in a supply-constrained urban one. The stability score of 50 reflects this directly, landing at the midpoint and signaling neither safety nor crisis, just meaningful uncertainty. No regulatory or vacancy data was provided, so no further claims on those dimensions are appropriate.

Against its neighbors, Marquette at $271,265 is priced above Marinette ($205,028), Lincoln ($237,321), Clark ($211,676), and Shawano ($258,748), and roughly in line with Trempealeau ($279,244). Marinette and Clark in particular offer entry prices $60,000 to $65,000 lower, which materially changes the debt service and the cash-flow math at the same interest rate. Shawano, at a slightly higher overall score of 74 and a lower price of $258,748, presents a competing case worth modeling side by side. The reason to choose Marquette over its neighbors is specifically if your analysis of local price drivers, lake or recreational property demand, or a specific acquisition opportunity gives you confidence that the 90-point appreciation score has legs. If you are primarily optimizing for near-term income or lower entry risk, Marinette or Clark close that gap faster and with less capital at risk.