Taylor County

Taylor County sits at a median home price of $233,997, up 9.6% year-over-year, with an affordability index of 80 out of 100. That appreciation figure is meaningful for a county of roughly 20,000 people, and it explains the scoring profile: an appreciation score of 81 against a cash-flow score of 0. The market's investment thesis is almost entirely price-growth driven. No cap rate or cash-on-cash data was calculable from the provided inputs, which itself tells you something: at a 6.85% financing rate on a $233,997 purchase with a $46,799 down payment, the numbers are not generating meaningful positive cash flow before you even account for operating expenses. This is an appreciation play, and the data makes no attempt to disguise that.

For the buyer who wants cash flow today, Taylor County as currently priced is a difficult fit. The cash-flow score of 0 is the clearest signal in the dataset. A value-add operator working to force appreciation through renovation might find more traction, given that the median price is still below $234,000 and the affordability index suggests prices remain accessible relative to local incomes. But the income side of any rent-to-price calculation will be the constraint, not acquisition cost. An appreciation-focused buyer willing to hold five-plus years has a more defensible case: 9.6% home price growth in a single year in a rural Wisconsin county is unusually sharp, and the county ranks 138th nationally out of 1,000 counties scored, placing it in the 82nd percentile overall. For a market this size, that ranking commands attention.

No economic anchor or employer data was provided for Taylor County, so the structural drivers of rental demand cannot be assessed from this dataset. What can be said is that a population of roughly 20,000 in a rural Wisconsin county implies a thin tenant pool. Stability scores at 50 out of 100, which is median, and for a buy-and-hold investor that score warrants caution. A thin, stable market is manageable; a thin, volatile one is not. Without more granular data on employment base or population trend direction, the stability score is the honest summary of what is knowable here.

The tax and insurance picture is a real underwriting consideration. 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. On a $233,997 purchase, that translates to an estimated $4,329 in annual property taxes, and combined with $538 in estimated annual insurance, you are looking at $406 per month in tax-and-insurance carry before mortgage, vacancy, maintenance, or management. That figure is a substantial drag on any cash-flow calculation and is the primary mechanical reason the cash-flow score lands at zero. Note that the 1.85% figure is a state-average estimate from the Tax Foundation; actual Taylor County and township rates may differ, and you should obtain the specific mill rate for any parcel before finalizing your underwrite.

The risk profile here is concentrated in two areas the data supports. First, thin market risk: 20,000 residents means a small number of active renters, limited comparables, and meaningful exposure if a single large local employer contracts. Second, the combination of high property taxes and a cash-flow score of 0 means this market punishes leverage. Any investor financing at or near the 6.85% rate used in the model needs to underwrite carefully for the scenario where appreciation flattens, because there is no yield cushion absorbing the carry cost.

Compared to the neighboring counties provided, Taylor sits at a median price of $233,997 with an overall score of 71. Marinette County is meaningfully cheaper at $205,028 while scoring 72 overall, making it the more affordable alternative with a slightly higher composite rating. Lincoln County is nearly identically priced at $237,321 with the same 72 overall score, offering a close substitute. Trempealeau County at $279,244 and Marquette at $257,231 both come in higher on price while scoring comparably, 73 and 72 respectively. Oconto County at $289,938 is the most expensive neighbor with the lowest score at 70. The case for choosing Taylor over its neighbors is the 9.6% year-over-year price appreciation, which is the one variable in this dataset that distinguishes it. If you are specifically underwriting for price growth and are indifferent to current yield, Taylor's trajectory makes it worth the look. If current cash flow is any part of the return requirement, Marinette's lower entry point warrants a side-by-side comparison first.