Price-to-Rent Ratio by City (2026)
Data last reviewed: July 2026
The price-to-rent ratio divides a home’s value by a year of rent for a comparable home. It is the single fastest way to see whether a city’s housing math favors owning or renting, and, flipped upside down, it approximates the gross yield a landlord earns. This page computes the ratio for 54 major US metros using Zillow’s June 2026 typical home values and asking rents, sorted from the most buy-friendly to the most rent-friendly.
How to read it: below 15, buying (and landlording) tends to win; 15-20 is a middle zone where mortgage rates and holding period decide; above 20, renting usually wins on pure monthly cost. The national ratio in mid-2026 is about 16 ($372,057 typical home value against $1,965/month typical rent). The spread runs from about 13 in Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Toledo (and 14 in Cleveland) to about 35 in San Jose.
Price-to-rent ratio by metro (2026)
Ratio = typical home value ÷ (typical monthly rent × 12), rounded to the nearest whole number. Values and rents are Zillow metro-level figures from June 2026; rows marked * use estimated values for metros outside the Zillow top-50 table. City propers often differ: city-of-Cleveland or city-of-Detroit homes are much cheaper than metro-wide values, pushing city-level ratios toward 10.
| Metro | Typical home value | Typical rent (mo) | Price-to-rent ratio | Lean |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chicago, IL | $359,897 | $2,275 | 13 | Buy |
| Pittsburgh, PA | $234,727 | $1,523 | 13 | Buy |
| Toledo, OH | $204,000 | $1,302 | 13 | Buy |
| Cleveland, OH | $254,986 | $1,474 | 14 | Buy |
| Memphis, TN | $246,954 | $1,435 | 14 | Buy |
| New Orleans, LA | $264,193 | $1,617 | 14 | Buy |
| Tulsa, OK | $220,000 | $1,300 | 14 | Buy |
| Akron, OH | $241,000 | $1,320 | 15 | Neutral |
| Birmingham, AL | $263,437 | $1,462 | 15 | Neutral |
| Detroit, MI | $270,689 | $1,518 | 15 | Neutral |
| Little Rock, AR | $218,000 | $1,250 | 15 | Neutral |
| Miami, FL | $476,638 | $2,695 | 15 | Neutral |
| Oklahoma City, OK | $247,292 | $1,393 | 15 | Neutral |
| Rochester, NY | $250,000 | $1,420 | 15 | Neutral |
| Tampa, FL | $359,973 | $2,020 | 15 | Neutral |
| Cincinnati, OH | $312,453 | $1,583 | 16 | Neutral |
| Houston, TX | $307,273 | $1,648 | 16 | Neutral |
| Indianapolis, IN | $296,207 | $1,558 | 16 | Neutral |
| Orlando, FL | $385,766 | $1,972 | 16 | Neutral |
| San Antonio, TX | $278,941 | $1,416 | 16 | Neutral |
| St. Louis, MO | $280,017 | $1,459 | 16 | Neutral |
| Atlanta, GA | $381,729 | $1,854 | 17 | Neutral |
| Buffalo, NY | $294,112 | $1,461 | 17 | Neutral |
| Jacksonville, FL | $352,624 | $1,708 | 17 | Neutral |
| Louisville, KY | $283,500 | $1,385 | 17 | Neutral |
| New York, NY | $736,042 | $3,573 | 17 | Neutral |
| Philadelphia, PA | $394,620 | $1,928 | 17 | Neutral |
| Virginia Beach, VA | $376,903 | $1,878 | 17 | Neutral |
| Baltimore, MD | $406,745 | $1,936 | 18 | Neutral |
| Columbus, OH | $334,559 | $1,528 | 18 | Neutral |
| Dallas-Fort Worth, TX | $365,048 | $1,673 | 18 | Neutral |
| Huntsville, AL | $330,000 | $1,550 | 18 | Neutral |
| Kansas City, MO | $331,552 | $1,545 | 18 | Neutral |
| Boston, MA | $744,972 | $3,210 | 19 | Neutral |
| Charlotte, NC | $389,125 | $1,750 | 19 | Neutral |
| Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN | $394,234 | $1,727 | 19 | Neutral |
| Richmond, VA | $399,039 | $1,772 | 19 | Neutral |
| Riverside, CA | $584,574 | $2,539 | 19 | Neutral |
| Las Vegas, NV | $427,825 | $1,748 | 20 | Neutral |
| Washington, DC | $584,571 | $2,448 | 20 | Neutral |
| Austin, TX | $424,110 | $1,653 | 21 | Rent |
| Milwaukee, WI | $393,554 | $1,552 | 21 | Rent |
| Nashville, TN | $456,355 | $1,810 | 21 | Rent |
| Phoenix, AZ | $445,343 | $1,733 | 21 | Rent |
| Sacramento, CA | $582,799 | $2,308 | 21 | Rent |
| Raleigh, NC | $436,249 | $1,689 | 22 | Rent |
| Denver, CO | $571,808 | $1,930 | 25 | Rent |
| Portland, OR | $551,911 | $1,805 | 25 | Rent |
| San Diego, CA | $940,304 | $2,991 | 26 | Rent |
| Los Angeles, CA | $965,867 | $2,927 | 27 | Rent |
| Seattle, WA | $742,220 | $2,269 | 27 | Rent |
| Salt Lake City, UT | $566,343 | $1,638 | 29 | Rent |
| San Francisco, CA | $1,144,062 | $3,301 | 29 | Rent |
| San Jose, CA | $1,579,943 | $3,729 | 35 | Rent |
What a low ratio means, for investors and residents
For investors, a low ratio is the raw material of cash flow. A ratio of 14 implies roughly 7% gross yield before expenses, which is why the buy-lean metros on this table, Toledo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Memphis, Tulsa, dominate the top of our cap rates by city ranking. The caveats are the same ones cap rates carry: low ratios often coexist with slower appreciation, older housing stock, and, in Ohio and Illinois, high property taxes that eat part of the advantage (see property tax rates by state).
For residents of low-ratio cities, buying tends to build equity faster than renting, even with modest appreciation, because the mortgage payment on a ratio-13 home is usually comparable to its rent. The main reasons to keep renting are short expected tenure and transaction costs, not the market math.
What a high ratio means
For residents of high-ratio metros, San Jose (~35), San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, Seattle, renting the same quality of home is usually cheaper per month than owning it at 2026 mortgage rates, sometimes by a wide margin. Buying there is a leveraged bet on continued appreciation, which has historically paid off over long horizons but is not free money. For investors, high-ratio metros mean negative leverage: the property’s yield is below the mortgage rate, so debt reduces cash flow. Only all-cash, appreciation-first strategies tend to make sense.
One practical pattern from this table: many people live in high-ratio cities but invest in low-ratio ones. Renting in San Francisco while owning rental exposure in Cleveland or Memphis, directly or through fractional shares on the Lofty marketplace, captures both sides of the spread.
Run your own numbers
Metro averages start the conversation; your block and your lease finish it. Compare renting against buying for your actual rent and target home price with the rent vs. buy calculator, or underwrite a specific rental with the rental property calculator. Current rent levels for these metros are on the average rent by city page, and our ranked best cities for investing in 2026 blends this ratio with growth and cost factors.
Frequently asked questions
- How is the price-to-rent ratio calculated?
- Divide the typical home value by one year of typical rent. A $360,000 home renting for $2,000/month has a ratio of 360,000 ÷ 24,000 = 15. Lower ratios mean rents are large relative to prices, which favors buying (or owning rentals); higher ratios favor renting.
- What is a good price-to-rent ratio for buying a home?
- The common rule of thumb: below 15 favors buying, 15-20 is a toss-up that depends on rates and how long you’ll stay, and above 20 favors renting. In mid-2026 the national ratio sits around 16, so the average US metro is genuinely in the middle zone.
- What does the price-to-rent ratio mean for rental property investors?
- It is roughly the inverse of gross rental yield. A ratio of 14 implies about 7% gross yield (1 ÷ 14) before expenses; a ratio of 30 implies barely 3.3%. That is why nearly all cash-flow-focused investors concentrate in metros with ratios under about 16.
- Which US cities have the lowest price-to-rent ratios in 2026?
- Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Toledo (~13) have the lowest metro-level ratios among the major metros tracked here, followed by Cleveland, Memphis, New Orleans, and Tulsa (~14). Chicago and New Orleans carry caveats (high property taxes and insurance costs, respectively). City-proper figures in Cleveland, Detroit, and Toledo can run near 10 because city home values sit far below metro-wide values.
- Which cities have the highest ratios?
- San Jose (~35), San Francisco and Salt Lake City (~29), Los Angeles and Seattle (~27), and San Diego (~26) top the list in mid-2026. New York metro is around 17, but Manhattan and prime Brooklyn taken alone would score far higher, metro-wide numbers blend in more affordable suburbs.
- Why is the ratio so different from city to city?
- Prices capitalize expectations, rents reflect current incomes. Supply-constrained coastal markets carry a large appreciation premium in prices that rents don’t share, pushing ratios up. In slow-growth Midwest metros, prices carry little premium over the income the house produces, keeping ratios low.
- Should renters in high-ratio cities feel bad about not buying?
- No. In a ratio-30 market, renting the same home often costs meaningfully less per month than owning it at 2026 mortgage rates, and the difference can be invested elsewhere, including in rental markets with better math, via REITs or fractional ownership. High ratios are precisely the markets where renting is the financially reasonable choice.
Methodology & sources
Home values are Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI) metro levels and rents are Zillow Observed Rent Index (ZORI) metro levels from the June 2026 Zillow market report, except rows marked as estimated, which are editorial approximations from recent Zillow-derived local data. Ratios are computed as value ÷ (rent × 12) and rounded, so every ratio on this page is internally consistent with the home value and rent shown beside it. Approximate, as of mid-2026. Data last reviewed: July 2026.
- Zillow Research — Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI) and Zillow Observed Rent Index (ZORI), metro-level typical home values and asking rents.
- Tax Foundation — Effective property tax rates on owner-occupied housing by state (2026 table, 2024 American Community Survey data).
- U.S. Census Bureau — American Community Survey data on household incomes, housing values, and property taxes paid.
- FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis — Historical series for home prices, rents, and mortgage rates used to sanity-check levels and trends.
All figures on this page are approximate estimates compiled for research and education, as of mid-2026. They are not investment advice, an offer to sell securities, or a substitute for your own underwriting. Metro-level averages hide wide neighborhood-level variation; always verify current local data before making decisions.