State rental market analysis · MI
Michigan rental markets
59 tracked cities over 20,000 population, 54 ranked and summarized by their median Overall. Every number traces to Census, Zillow and BLS. All states ranked →
Browse every Michigan ZIP Code area → · the full server-rendered index for this state.
Part of the East North Central Census division (Midwest region).
The honest read
Michigan ranks #19 of 51 states for rental investing, with a median Overall of 51.2/100 across its ranked cities, above the national median. 54 ranked cities roll up into this grade.
A state grade is the median of its ranked cities, a screen for where to look, not underwriting. Open any city below for its full shown-math breakdown, or run a specific deal through the cap rate and cash-flow calculators.
Where it ranks, factor by factor
Every value is the median across the 54 ranked cities in this state. The national rank compares all 51 states on that one factor; the engine already flips inverted factors (affordability, low unemployment) so a better rank always means a better market. Each factor sits in one of the model’s three categories (Cash Flow, Growth, or Stability); this is a representative summary, and the full thirteen-factor breakdown is on each city’s page. Full methodology.
| Factor | Category | State value | National rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross rent yield | Cash Flow | 9.8% | not measured |
| Rent growth | Growth | 4.7% | not measured |
| Home value growth | Growth | 5.5% | not measured |
| Population growth | Growth | 0.0% | not measured |
| Job growth | Growth | 0.6% | not measured |
| Price-to-income | Cash Flow | 3.6× | not measured |
| Unemployment | Stability | 3.8% | not measured |
| Rental demand | Stability | 39% renters · 515.0% vacancy | not measured |
| Income growth | Growth | 5.6% | not measured |
Every city in Michigan, ranked
Led by Roseville at 64/100. Click any column to re-sort; every city links to its full shown-math breakdown.
| MI rank | City | Grade | Cash Flow | Growth | Stability | Typical home value | Gross yield | National rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Roseville | 64 | A | C | B | $175,803 | 8.7% | #162 |
| 2 | Wyoming | 63 | B | C | B | $295,380 | 6.6% | #198 |
| 3 | Pontiac | 63 | A | C | C | $140,484 | 11.1% | #212 |
| 4 | Auburn Hills | 61 | A | C | C | $283,281 | 7.6% | #285 |
| 5 | Eastpointe | 61 | A | D | B | $157,494 | 10.8% | #293 |
| 6 | Kentwood | 60 | C | B | B | $338,592 | 5.7% | #304 |
| 7 | Oak Park | 59 | A | D | B | $237,113 | 7.5% | #331 |
| 8 | Midland | 57 | B | C | C | $259,992 | 6.6% | #408 |
| 9 | Grand Rapids | 56 | C | C | C | $311,699 | 6.1% | #439 |
| 10 | Garden City | 56 | A | D | C | $207,556 | 9.4% | #440 |
| 11 | St. Clair Shores | 56 | A | D | B | $236,247 | 8.1% | #452 |
| 12 | Dearborn Heights | 55 | A | C | C | $218,417 | 8.0% | #500 |
| 13 | Detroit | 55 | A | C | D | $76,084 | 21.3% | #502 |
| 14 | Warren | 55 | A | C | C | $202,927 | 8.0% | #508 |
| 15 | Lincoln Park | 55 | A | C | D | $155,021 | 10.7% | #514 |
| 16 | Walker | 55 | C | C | B | $363,095 | 5.0% | #519 |
| 17 | Lansing | 54 | A | C | D | $170,959 | 8.6% | #566 |
| 18 | Allen Park | 54 | B | D | C | $212,490 | 7.3% | #576 |
| 19 | Portage | 54 | B | C | C | $304,854 | 6.3% | #580 |
| 20 | Royal Oak | 53 | B | D | C | $337,493 | 7.6% | #599 |
| 21 | Burton | 53 | A | C | C | $160,360 | 7.4% | #614 |
| 22 | Monroe | 52 | C | C | C | $224,777 | 6.1% | #642 |
| 23 | Port Huron | 52 | B | C | C | $177,015 | 6.8% | #646 |
| 24 | Flint | 52 | A | D | D | $67,030 | 17.1% | #660 |
| 25 | Wyandotte | 52 | A | D | C | $191,950 | 7.9% | #663 |
| 26 | Livonia | 52 | B | D | C | $319,165 | 6.4% | #669 |
| 27 | Holland | 52 | D | B | C | $375,721 | 5.4% | #674 |
| 28 | Romulus | 51 | B | C | D | $206,880 | 7.1% | #688 |
| 29 | Madison Heights | 51 | A | D | D | $222,737 | 8.1% | #692 |
| 30 | Dearborn | 49 | B | C | D | $253,490 | 8.2% | #845 |
| 31 | Muskegon | 48 | B | C | D | $193,112 | 7.8% | #888 |
| 32 | Sterling Heights | 47 | C | D | C | $313,695 | 5.9% | #917 |
| 33 | Westland | 46 | B | D | D | $217,986 | 7.1% | #962 |
| 34 | Taylor | 46 | A | D | D | $180,863 | 9.9% | #963 |
| 35 | Hamtramck | 46 | B | B | F | $165,574 | 8.4% | #995 |
| 36 | Southfield | 46 | B | C | D | $258,011 | 7.2% | #1004 |
| 37 | Troy | 45 | C | C | C | $466,018 | 4.8% | #1035 |
| 38 | Rochester Hills | 45 | C | C | C | $476,673 | 4.6% | #1042 |
| 39 med | Bay City | 44 | A | D | D | $126,569 | 9.9% | #1086 |
| 40 | Inkster | 44 | A | C | F | $110,374 | 13.8% | #1110 |
| 41 | Southgate | 43 | A | D | D | $197,960 | 9.1% | #1151 |
| 42 | Novi | 42 | C | C | D | $475,952 | 4.9% | #1183 |
| 43 | Kalamazoo | 42 | C | D | C | $245,332 | 6.0% | #1189 |
| 44 | Jackson | 42 | C | D | D | $193,817 | 6.8% | #1196 |
| 45 | Battle Creek | 39 | B | D | D | $187,207 | 7.3% | #1311 |
| 46 | Norton Shores | 39 | C | C | D | $300,428 | 5.2% | #1332 |
| 47 | Farmington Hills | 38 | D | C | D | $395,176 | 4.2% | #1334 |
| 48 | Ann Arbor | 35 | F | C | C | $536,036 | 4.8% | #1493 |
| 49 | Marquette | 34 | F | C | C | $348,150 | 4.1% | #1535 |
| 50 | Adrian | 34 | C | D | D | $193,552 | 6.4% | #1543 |
| 51 | Birmingham | 33 | D | C | D | $755,859 | 4.5% | #1554 |
| 52 | Saginaw | 24 | A | D | F | $134,495 | 10.0% | #1768 |
| 53 | Mount Pleasant | 22 | D | F | D | $231,253 | 5.5% | #1779 |
| 54 | East Lansing | 18 | F | C | F | $328,740 | 4.7% | #1813 |
Data as of: Zillow ZHVI/ZORI through the latest monthly release · Census ACS 5-yr 2019–2023 · Census PEP July 2024 · BLS LAUS county 2023 annual. Generated 2026-09-01. Methodology & limitations · underwrite any specific deal with the free calculators.
Limited-data cities in Michigan
These 5 cities lack enough measured factors to rank, so they are excluded from the state grade; their pages show exactly what could be measured.
ZIP markets in Michigan
992 Census ZIP Codes (ZCTAs) in Michigan · 747 data-eligible for subscores. These are sub-city government areas ranked separately from the Michigan city table. The overall Rental Investor ZIP Score leaderboard leads; the two component subscores (affordability, rental-market context) follow as independent percentiles. ZIP ranks are shown within the ZIP universe only, never mixed with, and not directly comparable to, city ranks. Vintage: the Key metric column is Census ACS 2020–2024 (5-year), a newer release than the ACS 2019–2023 figures the city table above uses; the same measure can legitimately disagree between the two.
Best overall ZIP Codes in Michigan
Ranked by the overall Rental Investor ZIP Score. The # is each ZIP Code's canonical MI state rank; the smaller figure is its national rank. Separate from the Michigan city table and not directly comparable to it.
| MI rank | ZIP Code | Overallgrade · national | Key metric |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | 49426Hudsonville | A 68#785 nat | 4.3%Survey yield |
| #2 | 49424Beechwood | A 67#1,027 nat | 4.9%Survey yield |
| #3 | 48326Auburn Hills | A 66#1,346 nat | 7.2%Survey yield |
| #4 | 49508Kentwood | A 65#1,649 nat | 5.4%Survey yield |
| #5 | 49534Walker | A 65#1,715 nat | 5.0%Survey yield |
| #6 | 49519Wyoming | A 65#1,744 nat | 6.1%Survey yield |
| #7 | 49512Kentwood | A 64#1,902 nat | 4.8%Survey yield |
| #8 | 49659Lakes of the North | A 64#1,934 nat | 6.1%Survey yield |
| #9 | 49735Gaylord | B 64#2,042 nat | 5.4%Survey yield |
| #10 | 49503Grand Rapids | B 63#2,141 nat | 6.5%Survey yield |
| #11 | 49548Wyoming | B 63#2,300 nat | 9.1%Survey yield |
| #12 | 49544Walker | B 63#2,382 nat | 5.5%Survey yield |
Top affordability ZIP Codes in Michigan
State-scoped leaders on the affordability subscore only (national rank shown is within that subscore’s data-eligible universe). Substantially an inverse housing-cost signal: a component of the overall score, not a predicted return.
| # | ZIP Code | Affordability | Key metric |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 48745 | 75#2,042 nat | 8.5%Survey yield |
| 2 | 49840 | 75#2,080 nat | 7.8%Survey yield |
| 3 | 49288Waldron | 74#2,203 nat | 8.3%Survey yield |
| 4 | 49338Paris | 74#2,203 nat | 7.8%Survey yield |
| 5 | 48737 | 73#2,382 nat | 9.3%Survey yield |
| 6 | 49834 | 72#2,550 nat | 7.8%Survey yield |
| 7 | 48889 | 72#2,582 nat | 8.5%Survey yield |
| 8 | 49266 | 72#2,675 nat | 7.8%Survey yield |
| 9 | 49271Pittsford | 71#2,716 nat | 7.7%Survey yield |
| 10 | 49638Harrietta | 71#2,755 nat | 8.6%Survey yield |
| 11 | 49336Morley | 70#2,960 nat | 7.6%Survey yield |
| 12 | 49632Falmouth | 70#2,960 nat | 7.4%Survey yield |
Deepest rental-market ZIP Codes in Michigan
State-scoped leaders on the rental-market-context subscore only (national rank shown is within that subscore’s data-eligible universe). Rental depth/tightness: a separate component, never combined here with affordability.
| # | ZIP Code | Rental market | Key metric |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 49788Kincheloe | 81#153 nat | 9.1%Survey yield |
| 2 | 48238Detroit | 81#161 nat | 18.7%Survey yield |
| 3 | 48505Flint | 80#200 nat | 30.2%Survey yield |
| 4 | 48015Center Line | 80#221 nat | 6.0%Survey yield |
| 5 | 48203Detroit | 80#231 nat | 12.6%Survey yield |
| 6 | 48393Wixom | 80#231 nat | 3.7%Survey yield |
| 7 | 48235Detroit | 79#361 nat | 15.6%Survey yield |
| 8 | 49503Grand Rapids | 77#573 nat | 6.5%Survey yield |
| 9 | 48840Haslett | 76#759 nat | 4.6%Survey yield |
| 10 | 48202Detroit | 76#779 nat | 6.3%Survey yield |
| 11 | 48108Ann Arbor | 76#803 nat | 4.1%Survey yield |
| 12 | 49006Kalamazoo | 75#880 nat | 5.7%Survey yield |