Overall B2R Score
Hover a state for rank, overall score, grade & each metric's measurement. Click to open the state profile.
State Rankings Table
Sort any column or adjust each metric's weight — scores recalculate instantly.
Rank | State | Score | Grade | Tier | Pop Growth | Income Growth | Rent Growth | Job Growth | Appreciation | Vacancy | Land Cost | Crime | Permits | P/R Ratio | Prop Tax | Insurance | Landlord | Profile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Idaho | 100% | A+ | T1 | 6.2% | 7.5% | 7.3% | — | — | 4.9% | $52k | 240 | 870 | 14.2 | — | — | — | View |
| #2 | Arizona | 93% | A+ | T1 | 5.9% | 7.8% | 7.1% | — | — | 5.2% | $62k | 410 | 980 | 15.1 | — | — | — | View |
| #3 | Florida | 92% | A+ | T1 | 5.4% | 8.1% | 6.9% | — | — | 4.8% | $72k | 380 | 890 | 15.2 | — | — | — | View |
| #4 | Utah | 90% | A+ | T1 | 4.7% | 7.1% | 6.6% | — | — | 4.7% | $54k | 260 | 950 | 14.3 | — | — | — | View |
| #5 | Texas | 88% | A | T1 | 5.8% | 7.5% | 6.7% | — | — | 6% | $48k | 430 | 1,100 | 13.9 | — | — | — | View |
| #6 | Tennessee | 85% | A | T1 | 4.6% | 7.4% | 6.7% | — | — | 5.2% | $39k | 410 | 740 | 13.1 | — | — | — | View |
| #7 | South Carolina | 81% | A- | T1 | 4.3% | 6.8% | 6.5% | — | — | 5% | $42k | 390 | 690 | 13.7 | — | — | — | View |
| #8 | North Carolina | 81% | A- | T1 | 4.9% | 7.2% | 6.4% | — | — | 5.1% | $51k | 410 | 760 | 14.6 | — | — | — | View |
| #9 | Georgia | 81% | A- | T1 | 4.1% | 7.3% | 6.6% | — | — | 5.2% | $45k | 420 | 760 | 13.8 | — | — | — | View |
| #10 | Nevada | 78% | B+ | T2 | 4.9% | 7% | 6.8% | — | — | 5.4% | $61k | 460 | 720 | 14.9 | — | — | — | View |
| #11 | Montana | 69% | C+ | T2 | 3.8% | 6% | 6.4% | — | — | 5% | $58k | 280 | 310 | 16.3 | — | — | — | View |
| #12 | Colorado | 64% | C | T3 | 3.2% | 6.4% | 6.2% | — | — | 5.5% | $78k | 350 | 720 | 18.2 | — | — | — | View |
| #13 | Washington | 59% | D+ | T3 | 2.2% | 6.2% | 6.1% | — | — | 5.2% | $85k | 310 | 700 | 19.4 | — | — | — | View |
| #14 | Alabama | 59% | D+ | T3 | 2.8% | 5.4% | 5.9% | — | — | 6.3% | $34k | 430 | 520 | 11.8 | — | — | — | View |
| #15 | Oklahoma | 56% | D | T3 | 2.1% | 5.4% | 5.7% | — | — | 6.4% | $30k | 450 | 470 | 11.5 | — | — | — | View |
| #16 | South Dakota | 56% | D | T3 | 1.7% | 5.1% | 5.3% | — | — | 5.6% | $31k | 280 | 260 | 12 | — | — | — | View |
| #17 | Delaware | 56% | D | T3 | 2.7% | 5.8% | 5.7% | — | — | 5.9% | $59k | 310 | 380 | 16.4 | — | — | — | View |
| #18 | Nebraska | 54% | D | T3 | 1.5% | 5% | 5.2% | — | — | 5.7% | $33k | 290 | 350 | 12.3 | — | — | — | View |
| #19 | Virginia | 54% | D | T3 | 1.4% | 5.5% | 5.8% | — | — | 5.4% | $65k | 340 | 620 | 17.3 | — | — | — | View |
| #20 | Arkansas | 54% | D | T3 | 2.5% | 5.1% | 5.6% | — | — | 6.4% | $29k | 460 | 430 | 11.2 | — | — | — | View |
| #21 | Indiana | 54% | D | T3 | 1.9% | 5.2% | 5.4% | — | — | 6.1% | $36k | 390 | 510 | 12.9 | — | — | — | View |
| #22 | New Hampshire | 51% | D- | T3 | 1.2% | 5.3% | 5.6% | — | — | 4.9% | $69k | 210 | 240 | 18.4 | — | — | — | View |
| #23 | Iowa | 51% | D- | T3 | 1.4% | 4.9% | 5.1% | — | — | 5.8% | $32k | 310 | 330 | 12.1 | — | — | — | View |
| #24 | Minnesota | 49% | F | T4 | 1.3% | 5.2% | 5.3% | — | — | 5.9% | $48k | 300 | 460 | 16.7 | — | — | — | View |
| #25 | Oregon | 49% | F | T4 | 1.5% | 5.6% | 5.9% | — | — | 5.9% | $72k | 320 | 450 | 18.9 | — | — | — | View |
| #26 | Wisconsin | 47% | F | T4 | 1% | 4.8% | 5.1% | — | — | 6% | $38k | 320 | 410 | 13.6 | — | — | — | View |
| #27 | Missouri | 47% | F | T4 | 1.6% | 5.1% | 5.3% | — | — | 6.3% | $34k | 440 | 390 | 12.6 | — | — | — | View |
| #28 | Kansas | 47% | F | T4 | 1.2% | 4.8% | 5% | — | — | 6% | $31k | 370 | 290 | 11.7 | — | — | — | View |
| #29 | Kentucky | 47% | F | T4 | 1.7% | 5% | 5.2% | — | — | 6.4% | $33k | 410 | 340 | 12.4 | — | — | — | View |
| #30 | Maryland | 44% | F | T4 | 1.1% | 5.3% | 5.5% | — | — | 5.6% | $82k | 330 | 410 | 19.1 | — | — | — | View |
| #31 | Maine | 41% | F | T4 | 0.7% | 4.6% | 4.9% | — | — | 5.5% | $54k | 260 | 190 | 17.2 | — | — | — | View |
| #32 | New Mexico | 41% | F | T4 | 1.3% | 4.9% | 5.2% | — | — | 6.5% | $37k | 500 | 260 | 13.2 | — | — | — | View |
| #33 | North Dakota | 41% | F | T4 | 0.9% | 4.6% | 4.8% | — | — | 6.6% | $39k | 300 | 210 | 13.4 | — | — | — | View |
| #34 | Wyoming | 41% | F | T4 | 0.8% | 4.5% | 4.9% | — | — | 6.4% | $36k | 290 | 170 | 13 | — | — | — | View |
| #35 | Vermont | 41% | F | T4 | 0.6% | 4.7% | 5% | — | — | 5.3% | $60k | 200 | 120 | 17.8 | — | — | — | View |
| #36 | Massachusetts | 39% | F | T4 | 0.5% | 5.1% | 5.4% | — | — | 5.2% | $98k | 290 | 370 | 21.4 | — | — | — | View |
| #37 | Mississippi | 37% | F | T4 | 0.8% | 4.5% | 4.9% | — | — | 6.8% | $27k | 480 | 240 | 10.9 | — | — | — | View |
| #38 | Michigan | 37% | F | T4 | 0.6% | 4.7% | 5% | — | — | 6.7% | $42k | 450 | 420 | 14.8 | — | — | — | View |
| #39 | Ohio | 37% | F | T4 | 0.8% | 4.7% | 5% | — | — | 6.8% | $41k | 470 | 430 | 14.5 | — | — | — | View |
| #40 | Rhode Island | 34% | F | T5 | 0.5% | 4.9% | 5.2% | — | — | 5.4% | $86k | 310 | 180 | 20.7 | — | — | — | View |
| #41 | Pennsylvania | 34% | F | T5 | 0.6% | 4.6% | 5% | — | — | 6.5% | $56k | 420 | 410 | 16.8 | — | — | — | View |
| #42 | Connecticut | 34% | F | T5 | 0.8% | 4.5% | 4.9% | — | — | 6.1% | $74k | 280 | 250 | 19.6 | — | — | — | View |
| #43 | New Jersey | 32% | F | T5 | 0.7% | 4.8% | 5.1% | — | — | 5.4% | $105k | 350 | 380 | 22 | — | — | — | View |
| #44 | Louisiana | 31% | F | T5 | 0.9% | 4.4% | 4.8% | — | — | 7.2% | $35k | 520 | 280 | 13.5 | — | — | — | View |
| #45 | West Virginia | 29% | F | T5 | 0.3% | 4.1% | 4.5% | — | — | 7.1% | $26k | 500 | 180 | 11.1 | — | — | — | View |
| #46 | California | 29% | F | T5 | 0.6% | 4.8% | 5% | — | — | 5.6% | $120k | 420 | 640 | 22.5 | — | — | — | View |
| #47 | New York | 25% | F | T5 | 0.4% | 4.5% | 4.9% | — | — | 5.8% | $110k | 360 | 420 | 23.5 | — | — | — | View |
| #48 | Illinois | 25% | F | T5 | 0.3% | 4.3% | 4.7% | — | — | 6.9% | $67k | 440 | 390 | 18.5 | — | — | — | View |
| #49 | Hawaii | 19% | F | T5 | 0.4% | 4.1% | 4.6% | — | — | 5.7% | $135k | 300 | 120 | 23.1 | — | — | — | View |
| #50 | Alaska | 17% | F | T5 | 1.1% | 4.2% | 4.8% | — | — | 7.5% | $68k | 610 | 210 | 18.9 | — | — | — | View |
The Build 2 Rent Market Scorecard™ ranks all 50 U.S. states for Build-to-Rent (B2R) investment using 13 weighted macroeconomic, housing, and regulatory metrics. The top markets combine strong population and job growth, rising rents, affordable land, low vacancy, landlord-friendly laws, and favorable tax and insurance costs. These are the top 10 states for Build-to-Rent investing this year:
- #1Idaho100
- #2Arizona93
- #3Florida92
- #4Utah90
- #5Texas88
- #6Tennessee85
- #7South Carolina81
- #8North Carolina81
- #9Georgia81
- #10Nevada78
Income growth signals tenant quality and rent affordability. States with rising wages support sustainable rent increases and lower default risk. These states lead the nation in income growth:
- #1Florida8.1%
- #2Arizona7.8%
- #3Texas7.5%
- #4Idaho7.5%
- #5Tennessee7.4%
- #6Georgia7.3%
- #7North Carolina7.2%
- #8Utah7.1%
- #9Nevada7%
- #10South Carolina6.8%
Population growth is the engine of rental demand. States gaining residents — through migration, jobs, and affordability — see the strongest occupancy and rent appreciation. These states are growing fastest:
- #1Idaho6.2%
- #2Arizona5.9%
- #3Texas5.8%
- #4Florida5.4%
- #5Nevada4.9%
- #6North Carolina4.9%
- #7Utah4.7%
- #8Tennessee4.6%
- #9South Carolina4.3%
- #10Georgia4.1%
Rent growth directly drives top-line revenue for Build-to-Rent investors. Consistent rent appreciation compounds returns and protects against inflation. These states posted the strongest rent growth:
The scorecard evaluates every U.S. state across 13 metrics grouped into four pillars:
- Growth: Population, income, rent, job, and home appreciation growth.
- Cost & Cash Flow: Land cost, vacancy, building permits, and price-to-rent ratio.
- Risk & Regulation: Crime rate, property taxes, insurance cost, and landlord friendliness.
Each metric is min-max normalized across all 50 states so the best state scores 100 and the worst scores 0. For "lower is better" metrics (crime, vacancy, land cost, price-to-rent, property taxes, insurance cost), the scale is inverted. The 13 metrics are then combined using adjustable weights into a single Build 2 Rent Score (0–100), normalized so the top state equals 100%. Every score, grade, and rank on this page recalculates live when you change the weights in the table above.
Metric weights & data sources: Population Growth (12%, U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates); Income Growth (10%, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), QCEW); Rent Growth (10%, Zillow Observed Rent Index (ZORI)); Job Growth (10%, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Employment Statistics); Home Appreciation (8%, FHFA House Price Index); Vacancy Rate (7%, U.S. Census Bureau, Housing Vacancy Survey); Land Cost (7%, Zillow ZHVI, 2-BR Tier); Crime Rate (7%, FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program); Building Permits (7%, U.S. Census Bureau, Building Permits Survey); Price-to-Rent Ratio (7%, Zillow ZHVI ÷ ZORI × 12); Property Taxes (5%, Tax Foundation, State & Local Property Tax); Insurance Cost (5%, NAIC / Insurify Insurance Cost Index); Landlord Friendliness (5%, Rentometer Landlord-Friendly Index).
Build-to-Rent investing succeeds when demand, affordability, and a favorable regulatory environment align:
- Job & Income Growth — More jobs and higher wages mean more qualified renters who can absorb rent increases.
- Population & Rent Growth — In-migration drives occupancy; rent growth compounds your returns year over year.
- Home Appreciation — Builds equity and refinance options, the foundation of long-term wealth creation.
- Vacancy & Crime — Low vacancy means consistent cash flow; low crime attracts quality, long-term tenants.
- Land Cost & Building Permits — Affordable land improves yields; permit activity signals a healthy, growing supply pipeline.
- Property Taxes & Insurance — These are recurring carrying costs that directly erode net cash flow.
- Landlord Friendliness — Favorable eviction and tenant laws reduce losses from non-paying renters.
The Build 2 Rent Score distills all of this into a single, comparable number so investors can quickly identify which states offer the best combination of growth, cash flow, and risk-adjusted returns for Build-to-Rent portfolios.