Livingston County

Livingston County sits at a gross rent-to-price ratio of 6.22%, which places it firmly in appreciation territory rather than cash-flow territory. The model underwrite confirms this: at a $394,423 purchase price with 20% down, a 6.85% mortgage rate produces a monthly payment of $2,068 against estimated rent of $2,046, before a dime of expenses. Add $716 in estimated monthly operating costs and you're looking at negative $738 in monthly cash flow and a cash-on-cash return of -9.76%. The 4.05% cap rate tells a similar story, sitting below the cost of debt and well below what a cash-flow-oriented investor would typically require to pull the trigger. Year-over-year price appreciation of 4.01% is real, but it doesn't close that cash-flow gap at current debt service levels. The appreciation score of 83 out of 100 and cash-flow score of 62 out of 100 reflect exactly this split: the market rewards patience and equity accumulation more than it rewards a landlord checking the bank account every month.

That profile makes Livingston a fit for a specific kind of buyer: someone with a longer hold horizon, tolerance for modest negative carry in exchange for appreciation upside, and ideally the ability to bring a larger down payment or buy cash to shift the cash-on-cash math. It is not a market for an investor whose strategy depends on day-one positive cash flow. The stability score of 50 is a caution flag for anyone betting heavily on rental demand holding regardless of macro conditions. The overall score of 66 and national percentile rank of 75 say this market outperforms most of the country on a composite basis, but that composite is being carried by the appreciation score; the underlying cash-flow mechanics are marginal at best at standard leverage.

Livingston County's median household income of $96,135 is the clearest economic signal in this dataset. That number explains both the $394,423 median home price and the $2,046 median rent: this is an affluent suburban county where residents can pay higher rents and are accustomed to doing so. The affordability index of 68 and affordability score of 68 out of 100 are consistent with a market that is moderately stretched for buyers but still accessible enough to sustain rental demand from households who choose to rent rather than own. The population of 194,302 is large enough to support a functional rental market without the concentration risk that comes with very small counties. No economic anchors or employer data were provided, so drawing conclusions about job base or sector concentration isn't possible from the available data.

The tax and insurance picture here deserves a dedicated line on your underwrite. At a state-average effective property tax rate of 1.54%, which is high enough to flag as a genuine underwriting consideration, annual property taxes on the median-priced asset run approximately $6,074. Add $1,026 in annual insurance and you're carrying $592 per month in tax and insurance alone before touching maintenance, vacancy, or management. That $592 represents 29% of the $2,046 median rent. The caveat here is material: 1.54% is a state-average estimate drawn from Tax Foundation 2024 data, and actual rates at the county or township level in Michigan can differ meaningfully, so verify the specific parcel's tax bill before closing. Michigan's property tax structure also includes caps on assessment increases for existing owners, which can work in a long-term holder's favor, but that benefit doesn't show up until after purchase.

The neighboring county data provides useful context. Clinton County, at a $299,268 median home price and rent-to-price ratio of 6.96%, is the most direct comparison: you're buying roughly $95,000 less house and getting a better gross yield, which translates to more favorable cash-flow math at any debt service level. Montcalm and Mecosta counties come in even lower, in the $210,000 to $221,000 range, with rent-to-price ratios near 6.3% to 6.6%, but at lower absolute rent levels ($1,157 to $1,168), suggesting a different demand profile and likely lower income tenants. Huron and Roscommon counties top out below $195,000 with no rent data provided, making direct comparison incomplete. All five neighbors score identically at 66 overall, the same as Livingston, meaning the composite score doesn't differentiate them. The reason to choose Livingston over these neighbors is specifically its appreciation profile, its higher-income tenant base, and its $2,046 median rent, which provides more buffer in absolute dollar terms even if the yield percentage is similar. Choose a neighbor when the cash-flow math matters more than the appreciation upside, or when entry price is the binding constraint on your capital stack.