Some of the country’s least expensive Division I college markets still offer homes at prices far below the national norm. However, low prices don’t necessarily mean buyers will have an easy path to a deal.
A Sept. 9 analysis of 231 Division I college markets ranked Detroit as the most affordable, followed by Jackson, Mississippi; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Macomb, Illinois; and Peoria, Illinois. The ranking used 2025 median listing prices and excluded markets with fewer than 15 listings.
For agents working with relocation clients, first-time buyers or investors, the list can identify markets worth exploring. Current inventory, competition and ownership costs still determine whether those prices translate into workable purchases.
The most affordable Division I college markets
Three of the five least expensive markets are in the Midwest. Across the full ranking, about 38% were in the South and roughly 30% were in the Midwest.
Jackson posted a 2025 median asking price of $106,654, down more than 12% year over year. Pine Bluff came in at $106,980, up more than 7%, while Macomb rose 3% to $107,125. Peoria’s median asking price was $118,462. Senior economist Hannah Jones attributed lower prices in many of these markets partly to less expensive land and construction, slower population growth and older housing stock.
Agents should keep the methodology in view when discussing the numbers with clients. The ranking covers Division I college markets and uses 2025 asking prices rather than today’s active inventory or completed 2026 sales.
Low prices can still come with competition
More recent sales data shows how differently affordable college markets can behave. A July analysis of college-town home sales examined 50 large college towns with at least 50 sales from March through May. Dayton, Ohio, had the lowest median sale price in that study at $139,000. Syracuse, New York, followed at $180,000, while Mount Pleasant, Michigan, was at $184,000.
Syracuse also had some of the strongest buyer competition in the group. Its median sale price climbed 12.5% year over year, and 55.3% of homes sold above asking price.
Other lower-cost college markets were moving the opposite way. Mount Pleasant’s median sale price fell 11.3% year over year, while Stillwater, Oklahoma, declined 9.3%. The Close previously examined the uneven price growth across affordable college towns, including the double-digit gains in Syracuse and other university markets.
Those differences can change the conversation an agent has with a buyer. A comparatively low median may come with bidding pressure in one market and more negotiating room in another.
Check the buyer’s market, not just the town median
Townwide medians cannot show whether enough homes are available in a client’s price range. Agents should check current MLS inventory, recent comparable sales, list-to-sale ratios and days on market for the relevant ZIP code and property type.
The monthly payment requires another layer of review. Property taxes, homeowners insurance, HOA dues and the condition of a particular home can change the affordability picture even when its purchase price looks manageable. Recent affordability data also shows why agents should ground buyer conversations in payment capacity, not price alone.
National data shows why that verification remains important. A joint housing affordability analysis found that a household earning $75,000 could afford a home priced at about $261,140 under the study’s assumptions. In March, just 23% of active listings were below that threshold, compared with roughly 44% in a market where available homes were better aligned with household incomes.
Those are national figures rather than measurements of individual college markets. They should not be used to estimate what a particular client can afford.
What agents should do next
College-town rankings can be useful prospecting tools for agents working with buyers leaving higher-cost metros, first-time buyers seeking lower entry prices and investors evaluating university markets. Before presenting a town as an affordable option, compare the client’s lender-confirmed purchasing power with current inventory, local competition and recurring ownership costs.
That same distinction between buyer leverage and actual affordability is important when local inventory looks favorable but remains outside a client’s budget. Investors also need neighborhood-level rent, vacancy and rental-rule data rather than relying on university demand alone.
The latest ranking shows where home prices remain unusually low. For agents, the more valuable question is whether today’s homes, financing costs and market conditions make those prices attainable for the client sitting across the table.