Placer County · Population 159,135
Strongest in Market Growth and Local Government Stability; watch Climate & Insurance Risk.
Roseville shows strong growth, high-income households, and solid municipal reserves, but affordability pressure, cooling permit activity, and county-level wildfire risk make it better suited for selective long-term holds than aggressive yield plays.
Roseville shows durable growth, a strong income base, and a well-reserved city government — but entry prices are high (~5.6× income), metro construction momentum has cooled, and the city ran an operating deficit in FY2025 that sits beneath an otherwise healthy fiscal picture. Better suited to investors who can tolerate higher acquisition costs in exchange for a stable, affluent, growing suburban market — while keeping an eye on whether the budget gap proves temporary.
MuniSpot MuniScore of 74 (0–100). Strong reserves (84) and a strong local economy (84) — high incomes, low poverty — carry the score, but budgetary performance is weak (18) on a negative operating margin (−6.9%): the city spent more than it took in operationally in FY2025. Debt data was unavailable and only six underlying metrics were reported, so MuniSpot flags confidence as MODERATE.
Population is up 7.7% since 2020 and median household income ($117k) sits well above state and national levels, with 44% of adults holding a bachelor's degree — a deep, high-earning demand base.
Steady household formation (population +7.7%) and a high 69% homeownership rate point to durable owner-occupier demand; household size (2.61) skews family-oriented.
Homes trade near 5.6× median income and renters spend ~36% of income on rent — both above comfortable thresholds, which can cap further rent and price growth.
FEMA rates wildfire risk "Relatively High" — but that's a Placer County figure, and Roseville sits on the valley floor, away from the foothill terrain that drives the county rating. True city-level risk is likely lower; pull the Census-tract NRI value to confirm.
Computed from the category scores above using a transparent weighted rubric — not investment advice. Each strategy weights the categories it actually depends on.
| Strategy | Fit | Score | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
Long-term single-family rental Steady demand from a deep owner-occupier market, manageable entry basis, low hazard, stable city services. | Mixed | 64 | Driver Housing Demand (72) Drag Climate & Insurance Risk (38) |
Small multifamily Renter demand and entry basis dominate; supply context and fiscal stability matter more than headline growth. | Good fit | 67 | Driver Housing Demand (72) Drag Entry Price Pressure (48) |
Infill / small-lot development Needs an active permit environment and growth tailwind; fiscal stability supports entitlements and services. | Good fit | 71 | Driver Market Growth (81) Drag Climate & Insurance Risk (38) |
Build-to-rent Demand + growth must justify new supply; permit context shows competition and absorption. | Mixed | 64 | Driver Market Growth (81) Drag Climate & Insurance Risk (38) |
High-yield cash flow Yield depends on a cheap basis — affordability dominates; demand and hazard set the floor. | Weak fit | 36 | Capped by Entry Price Pressure (48) — yield needs a cheap basis to begin with — at these entry prices, strong demand can't manufacture cash flow. |
How Roseville stacks up against nearby cities on the same metrics and scoring methodology.
| Category | Roseville | Rocklin | Folsom |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 68 | 51 | 68 |
| Local Government Stability | 74 | — | — |
| Market Growth | 81 | 61 | 79 |
| Housing Demand | 72 | 50 | 68 |
| Entry Price Pressure | 48 | 48 | 57 |
| Climate & Insurance Risk | 38 | 38 | 55 |
A “—” means that category isn't scored for that city yet (e.g. Local Government Stability is only present where MuniSpot is wired). Missing categories don't affect overall scores — totals renormalize across what's present.
Population up ~7.7% since 2020, household income well above state and national medians, a deep owner-occupier base (69% ownership) that supports resale demand, and strong municipal reserves (MuniSpot reserves score 84) that give the city a financial cushion.
The MuniSpot data surfaces a signal that Zillow-style sources miss: despite strong reserves and a strong local economy, Roseville posted a negative operating margin (−6.9%) in FY2025, pulling its budgetary score to 18 — worth watching for whether spending outpaces revenue again. On the market side, affordability pressure may cap future rent and price growth, metro single-family permits fell ~11% in 2025, and regional wildfire exposure warrants an insurance-cost check.
Strategy signals from this city's metric picture — not advice.
Forward-looking signals to watch. Phrased as conditions, not predictions.
Each metric shows its source, year, and confidence. Note geography: permit data is metro-level and FEMA hazard data is county-level — see confidence labels.
| Metric | Value | Source | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Population | 159,135 people | U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates (V2023) (2023) | High confidence |
| Population growth since 2020 | 7.7% | U.S. Census Bureau (2020 base 147,791 → 2023 est 159,135) (2023) | High confidence |
| Median age | 40.2 years | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2023) | High confidence |
| Median household income | $117,354 | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2019–2023, in 2023 dollars) (2023) | High confidence |
| Per capita income | $52,720 | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2023) | High confidence |
| Poverty rate | 5.9% | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2023) | High confidence |
| Bachelor's degree or higher (age 25+) | 44.1% | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2023) | High confidence |
| Total households | 57,921 households | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2023) | High confidence |
| Persons per household | 2.61 | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2023) | High confidence |
| Homeownership rate | 68.8% | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS (2024) (2024) | High confidence |
| Renter-occupied share | 31.2% | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS (derived from tenure) (2024) | High confidence |
| Median home value | $661,400 | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS (2024) (2024) | High confidence |
| Median gross rent | $2,099/mo | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2019–2023) (2023) | High confidence |
| Median monthly owner cost (with mortgage) | $2,842/mo | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Estimates (2019–2023) (2023) | High confidence |
| Home value to income ratio | 5.6× | Derived ($661,400 median value ÷ $117,354 median income) (2024) | High confidence |
| Median renter household income | $70,684 | U.S. Census Bureau, ACS (2022) (2022) | Medium confidence |
| Median renter cost burden (rent ÷ renter income) | 35.6% | Derived ($2,099/mo × 12 ÷ $70,684 median renter income) (2023) | Medium confidence |
| Single-family permits (metro, full year 2025) | 7,626 permits | U.S. Census Bureau Building Permits Survey via FRED, Sacramento–Roseville–Folsom MSA (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Single-family permit change YoY (metro) | -11.2% | U.S. Census Bureau via FRED (2024: 8,585 → 2025: 7,626) (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Single-family permits per 1,000 residents (metro) | 3.1 per 1,000 | Derived (7,626 permits ÷ 2,463,127 metro pop) (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Wildfire risk rating (Placer County) | Relatively High | FEMA National Risk Index, Placer County (2023) | Medium confidence |
| Wildfire expected annual loss (Placer County) | $13,000,000/yr | FEMA National Risk Index, Placer County (2023) | Medium confidence |
| Wildfire annual frequency (Placer County) | 0.4%/yr | FEMA National Risk Index, Placer County (2023) | Medium confidence |
| Municipal financial health (MuniScore, 0–100) | 74.2 | MuniSpot, MuniScore (City of Roseville, EIN 946000409) (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Reserves strength (MuniSpot, 0–100) | 84 | MuniSpot (40–60% of MuniScore) (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Local economy strength (MuniSpot, 0–100) | 84.2 | MuniSpot (25% of MuniScore) (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Budgetary performance (MuniSpot, 0–100) | 18 | MuniSpot (15% of MuniScore) (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Operating margin (revenue vs. expenses) | -6.94% | MuniSpot, FY2025 (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Total fund balance (% of revenue) | 73.75% | MuniSpot, FY2025 (2025) | Medium confidence |
| Net pension liability (% of revenue) | 74.59% | MuniSpot, FY2025 (2025) | Medium confidence |
Before underwriting a deal in Roseville:
Get an email when Roseville's score or municipal-finance signals change. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.