Best U.S. Real Estate Markets for Foreign Investors (After Buying 120+ Properties)

Updated June 16th 2026

FREE DOWNLOAD: 10 Costly Mistakes Foreigners Make Buying U.S. Real Estate

If you’d asked me this question in 2016, I’d have given you a very different answer.

Back then, I thought the best investment markets were simply the cheapest ones.

After buying, renovating, financing, refinancing, and managing more than 120 rental properties across the United States while living overseas, I eventually learned that cheap property and good investment property are not the same thing.

In fact, some of the worst investments I’ve ever made were also some of the cheapest. And don’t worry, I’ll tell you exactly what they were later in this post.

Today, I evaluate markets and invest very differently.

This isn’t another list of cities ranked by cap rates or projected returns.

Instead, I’m going to show you the markets I personally like today, the criteria I use to evaluate them, and the lessons I learned the hard way after nearly losing everything in 2023.

If you’re looking to build long-term wealth through U.S. rental property as a foreign investor, this is where I’d start.

Key Takeaways:

• The best cash flow rental property markets are not necessarily the cheapest markets.

• Housing affordability is one of the most important indicators of a stable long-term rental market.

• Neighborhood selection is often more important than city selection.

• High projected returns on paper frequently come with higher operational risk.

• The quality of your tenants is often determined by the quality of the neighborhood and property you buy.

• After buying more than 120 rental properties, I now prioritise asset quality over maximum cash flow.

• Kansas City and Cleveland remain two of my favourite markets for foreign investors due to their affordability, rental demand, and long-term fundamentals.

• The best investment strategy for most foreign investors is usually boring: buy quality assets, use sensible financing, and hold them for the long term.

GET MY FREE FOREIGN INVESTOR STARTER KIT

Join more than 1,000+ foreign investors and access my most popular guides, educational videos, webinars, and resources to help you understand how U.S. real estate investing works before you buy your first property

By requesting the Starter Kit, you agree to receive educational emails from Cashflow Rentals. No spam, ever! You may unsubscribe at any time.

Why Most “Best Market” Lists Are Wrong

If you spend enough time on Google, YouTube, BiggerPockets, Reddit, or Facebook groups, you’ll quickly discover plenty of “Gurus” and investment property sellers claiming to reveal the best real estate markets in America.

You’ll also notice that most of them follow the same formula.

A list of cities.

A few statistics.

Some population growth data.

A cap rate.

A cash flow projection.

And then a proud declaration that Market X is somehow better than Market Y.

The problem is that real estate investing doesn’t work like that.

If it did, I wouldn’t have spent years building a portfolio of more than 120 rental properties only to nearly lose everything in 2023.

One of the biggest mistakes I made early in my investing career was focusing too heavily on the numbers at the expense of some just as – if not more than – important factors.

Personally, I was looking for the cheapest markets.

The highest cash flow.

The highest rent-to-price ratios.

The best projected returns fo rthe smallest investment possible.

And to be fair, those things do matter.

But what I eventually learned is that they only tell a small part of the story.

The problem with many of these “best market” lists is that they over-prioritise cash flows as the be all and end all statistics that matters most, and they treat all cash flow as equal.

In the real world, it isn’t either of those things.

A property producing $500 per month on paper that’s in a rough neighborhood with constant vacancies, evictions, repairs, and tenant turnover is not the same investment as a property producing $250 per month (that actually shows up in your bank account) in a stable neighborhood with long-term tenants and minimal maintenance.

The spreadsheet might look great, but the reality is very different.

That’s exactly what happened to me.

When I built and scaled my portfolio to 124 rental properties, the ones that looked best on paper turned out to be some of the worst investments I ever made.

Meanwhile, many of the properties producing more modest returns quietly delivered consistent cash flow year after year with very few problems.

It took me far too long to realise that the best investment market isn’t necessarily the one with the highest projected return.

It’s the one that allows you to buy quality assets, attract quality tenants, generate reliable cash flow, and hold those properties for a very long time.

That’s why I evaluate markets very differently today.

Before I look at rental yields, cash flow projections, or cap rates, I want to understand something much more important:

Can ordinary people afford to live there?

Because in my experience, housing affordability sits at the heart of almost every successful rental market.

And that’s where I’d start if I were choosing a new market today.

What I Look For In A Rental Property Market

Over the years, I’ve learned that the best rental property markets tend to share many of the same characteristics.

But before we get into those, it’s important to understand one thing that I didn’t really get early on:

The city or metro is far less important than the neighborhood and the street.

Buying in a bad neighborhood on on a sketchy street in a good city is still buying in a bad neighborhood.

I see this all the time in places like Cleveland, Ohio and Detroit, Michigan.

At the city or metro level, everything looks fantastic.

Strong rental yields.

Affordable housing.

Good employment numbers.

Growing populations.

But the variation from one neighborhood to the next can be staggering.

Just because a house is located in Detroit doesn’t automatically make it a good investment.

Not even close.

Before I invest anywhere, I’m trying to answer one simple question:

Is this house in a place where ordinary people can afford to live, work, raise a family, and build a future?

If the answer is yes, there’s a good chance I’m looking at a market worth exploring.

If the answer is no, I’m probably looking at a market with higher operational risk, lower tenant quality, and potentially less long-term upside.

That’s why I focus less on finding the “best city” and more on identifying cities that possess the right fundamentals, and then start looking at neighborhoods with the best balance of opportunity and ongoing improvement.

Housing Affordability

For me, housing affordability is probably the single most misunderstood, yet most important, factor real estate investors should be thinking about.

In my experience, affordability sits at the heart of every healthy housing market.

Affordability isn’t just about cheap houses. Far from it.

Affordability is about whether the people who actually live and work in the area can realistically afford local rents and mortgage payments based on current house prices and household incomes.

If local residents can afford to buy homes, rents remain affordable relative to incomes, and employers continue creating jobs, you tend to get a much more stable housing market.

That’s exactly what we’re seeing across much of the U.S. Midwest today.

While many coastal and Sun Belt markets experienced explosive price growth between 2020 and 2023, then fall again rapidly through 2025-6, house prices in many Midwestern cities remained much more closely aligned with local incomes.

As a result, people can still afford to live there.

And that’s incredibly important.

Because when housing remains affordable, you tend to see:

• More stable home values
• More stable rental demand
• Less speculative activity
• Lower vacancy rates
• Fewer dramatic market corrections

In other words, you get a healthier market.

That’s one of the things I find most appealing about the Midwest.

Not because it’s the cheapest part of the United States.

But because it’s one of the few regions where housing is still genuinely affordable for ordinary working families.

And in my experience, that’s a very strong foundation for long-term real estate investing.

Employment and Economic Diversity

I’m not particularly interested in boom-and-bust economies.

As someone smarter than me once said:

“Time in the market beats timing the market.”

Instead, I look for cities with diverse local economies and stable employment markets.

Healthcare.

Logistics.

Manufacturing.

Education.

Government.

Professional services.

The more diverse the local economy, the less dependent the city is on a single employer or industry.

That generally creates a more resilient rental market over the long term.

If one employer closes, relocates, or downsizes, there are still plenty of other businesses creating jobs and supporting housing demand.

I’m also particularly interested in industries with strong long-term growth prospects.

Healthcare is a great example.

People will always need doctors, nurses, hospitals, care homes, and medical services. As populations age, demand for healthcare workers is likely to increase rather than decrease.

Compare that to markets heavily dependent on a single employer, commodity, or fashionable industry.

Look at all the huge tech companies now laying off workers in the tens of thousands as Ai replaces jobs we thought would last forever.

When times are good, those markets can grow incredibly quickly.

But when conditions change, they can decline just as fast.

As a long-term rental property investor, I’m not trying to predict the next economic boom.

I’m looking for cities where people are likely to have stable employment, stable incomes, and the ability to pay their rent or mortgage for decades to come.

In my experience, boring usually beats exciting.

Population Stability

A lot of investors focus heavily on population growth as one of the most important metrics when analyzing a market.

They’ll mostly look at metro and citywide data.

I think that’s a mistake (I did this, too).

Of course, I’d rather invest in a city that is growing than one that is shrinking.

But we assume that braod area population growth automatically translates into better investment performance.

It doesn’t.

Cleveland, Ohio is a great example.

The population of Cuyahoga County (that contains Cleveland proper) had been declining for decades (until 2022).

Yey property values and rents have increased consistently since 1975.

But again, the metro-level data is not particulalry useful. You have to understand what’s going on at the neighborhood level.

A city or metro with rapidly rising population still has neghborhoods where people are moving away due to economic decline, crime, and other reasons.

At the same time, population can be falling at the metro level, and yet you’ll find popular neghborhoods with a waiting list of homebuyers and renters.

At the end of the day, I don’t chase population growth. I look for neighborhood-level stability.

Neighborhood Quality

If I had to choose between a great house in a bad neighborhood and a bad house in a great neighborhood, I’d choose the neighborhood every single time.

As one of my own Mentors says:

“Buy the dirt first, then look at the box”.

Why?

Because you can renovate a house. You can’t renovate the dirt it sits on.

And you certainly can’t renovate the tenant pool you’re going to be working with and relying on for your income and asset upkeep.

This is where I got it very wrong!

One of the biggest mistakes I made when I started building and scaling my U.S. rental property portfolio back in 2016 was focusing too heavily on the property itself.

I’d find a cheap house.

Run the numbers.

Calculate the cash flow.

Estimate the renovation costs.

And if it looked good on paper – I’d buy it!

What I wasn’t paying enough attention to was the neighborhood.

That turned out to be a very expensive lesson for me and my family.

Today, I believe the neighborhood is absolutely more important than the house.

A good neighborhood can support an average property.

A bad neighborhood can destroy a great one.

That’s because neighborhoods largely determine the type of tenant you’ll attract.

And as we’ve already discussed, tenant quality has an enormous impact on vacancy, turnover, maintenance, rent collection, and ultimately your long-term returns.

That said, I’m not looking for luxury neighborhoods.

In fact, I actively avoid them.

The best opportunities I’ve found are always in working-class neighborhoods that are improving.

Areas where:

• Crime is trending down
• Homes are being renovated
• Infrastructure is improving
• Local businesses are opening
• Families are moving in
• Homeownership is increasing

At the same time, prices and rents are still very affordable.

Those are the neighborhoods where you’ll find the best balance between affordability, cash flow, and future appreciation.

They’re also the neighborhoods where I’ve made the most money.

But this is where many investors get into trouble.

They push too far.

They keep moving down the quality scale in search of higher returns until they end up buying in areas they should never have considered in the first place.

I’ve done it myself.

The spreadsheet looked fantastic.

The reality on the other hand was disasterous.

One final point I think it’s important to make here.

When I say neighborhood, I really mean street.

Because in many of the markets I invest in, the difference between a good investment and a bad investment can literally be three or four blocks.

I’ve seen streets where every other house is being renovated, homes rent within days, and first-time buyers are actively competing for properties.

Then a few blocks away you’ll find vacant houses, persistent crime, and a completely different tenant profile.

For example, I own several rental properties in the suburbs of Kansas City, Missouri.

One of them is a five-bedroom house on Prospect Avenue.

The property itself performs extremely well and is located on a block that has seen significant investment and improvement over recent years.

But Prospect Avenue is a long road.

Travel a few minutes in either direction and you’ll find blocks that are still struggling with vacancy, crime, and neglected housing stock.

The point is that two properties can have the same city, zip code, and even street name, yet produce completely different investment outcomes.

That’s why I always analyse investments at street level, not just neighborhood level.

Because real estate isn’t just local.

It’s hyper-local.

Rent-to-Price Ratio

Finally, of course, the numbers still need to make sense.

The property doesn’t need to generate spectacular returns. But it does need to generate reliable returns.

In fact, one of the most important lessons I’ve learned is that there is often an inverse relationship between cash flow and risk.

Many investors think of cap rates as a measure of return.

But it’s actually more accurate to think of them as a measure of required return based on perceived risk.

The higher the cap rate, the higher the perceived risk.

That’s how big institutional investors value large multifamily properties, and we’re seeing the impact of that right now.

Back in 2020, cap rates on multifamily were low. That meant investors were prepared to pay a higher price for the income.

Today, there’s a higher perceived risk to that income, so cap rates are much higher.

And because values are calculated by capitalizing income at those higher cap rates, asset values have fallen.

I’m seeing a lot of multimafily investors that purchased around 2020 and did everything right. They added value, improved rpopertoies, cut operating costs, and lifted rents.

Overall those properties are now producing much more net income.

But beacuse cap rate are higher, those properties are being valued lower than their 2020 value, even with all of the imporvements.

And in my experience, that’s often true with single family homes, too.

The highest cash-flowing properties frequently come with the highest operational risk.

Higher vacancy.

Higher turnover.

More deferred maintenance.

More capital expenditure.

More property management issues.

Why?

Because cash flow generally increases as rents become higher relative to property values.

And the lower the property value, the lower the asset quality, neighborhood quality, and tenant quality tends to be.

Of course there are exceptions.

But after buying more than 120 rental properties, I’ve found that rule to be remarkably reliable.

One of the reasons I continue to focus on certain Midwestern markets is that they still offer a balance between affordability, rental demand, appreciation potential, and cash flow.

For me, that’s been the sweet spot.

If we take a step back and apply a little common sense, an $80,000 house is $80,000 for a reason.

The question you need to ask yourself is whether that reason creates risks you are willing to accept.

With house prices across much of the United States now sitting near record highs, finding that balance has become increasingly difficult.

That’s exactly why the markets in the next section continue to attract my attention.

Why I Still Focus on the Midwest for Cash Flow Rental Properties

If you’ve read this far, you’ve probably already guessed where this is heading.

The reason I focus much of my investing activity on the Midwest is simple:

It’s not beacuse that’s where properties are cheap (although they are, relatively speaking).

it’s because Midwest property markets consistently perform well across almost all of the criteria I’ve mentioned above.

Housing affordability is some of the strongest in the United States.

Jobs markets are generally stable and diversified.

There’s a lot of inward migration as Americans look for a lower cost of living and cheper housing costs.

And there are lots of neighborhoods benefiting from ongoing investment and redevelopment.

And perhaps most importantly, we can still find properties that generate meaningful cash flow without taking excessive risk.

That’s becoming increasingly difficult elsewhere.

Between 2020 and 2023, a lot of housing markets across the United States experienced extraordinary price growth.

Florida.

Texas.

Arizona.

Parts of California.

In those cases, house prices increased far faster than local incomes.

Then interest rates shot back up to historical more normal levels.

Affordability deteriorated.

Demand weakened.

And many of those markets began correcting (and still are today).

The Midwest has largely avoided that boom-and-bust cycle.

Instead, most Midwestern markets have experienced slower, steadier growth supported by local employment, local incomes, and housing affordability.

For me, that’s exactly what a healthy housing market should look like.

Boring? Maybe.

Predictable? Absolutely.

One of the biggest advantages of the Midwest is that investors can still acquire quality rental properties at sensible price points.

For example, I recently helped a Canadian investor purchase a fully renovated four-bedroom, two-bathroom rental property in Kansas City for $163,000.

The property rents for around $1,700 per month and generates approximately $500 to $600 per month in free cash flow after financing costs, operating expenses, and reserves.

Try finding that combination of affordability, cash flow, and renovation quality in many coastal markets today.

You won’t.

That doesn’t mean the Midwest is perfect. It isn’t.

Every city has challenging neighborhoods.

Every city has neighborhoods I’d avoid.

And every investment still requires proper due diligence and underwriting.

But when I look at the combination of affordability, employment, cash flow potential, neighborhood quality, and long-term stability, the Midwest is a standout.

That’s why most of the markets I’m about to discuss are located there.

Not because they’re the cheapest.

Not because they produce the highest cap rates.

But because they offer what I believe is the best balance between risk and reward for long-term rental property investors.

Kansas City, Missouri

If I had to choose one market that best reflects my current investment philosophy, it would probably be Kansas City.

I’ve owned multiple rental properties there myself and helped numerous foreign investors purchase properties there.

I’ve also built a network of contractors, property managers, lenders, inspectors, and other professionals that I trust.

In fact, one of the biggest reasons I like Kansas City has nothing to do with Kansas City itself.

It has to do with the people.

As a foreign investor, you’re relying on other people for almost everything.

Finding opportunities.

Evaluating neighborhoods.

Managing renovations.

Inspecting properties.

Collecting rent.

Managing tenants.

That’s why I’d rather invest in a 7/10 market with a 10/10 team than a 10/10 market with a 5/10 team.

Kansas City gives me both and also aligns closely with everything I’ve discussed throughout this article so far.

Housing is still relatively affordable… more so for renters than homebuyers.

The employment base is diverse and stable.

There’s significant healthcare investment and expansion.

Population growth has been consistently steady.

And you can still find fully renovated rental properties at sensible price points well below the U.S. median house price.

Today it’s still possible to buy a fully renovated four-bedroom home in many Kansas City neighborhoods for between $150,000 and $250,000.

Those same properties can rent for $1,500 to $2,500 per month.

More importantly, those rents tend to attract the type of long-term tenants I’m actually looking for.

Not bottom-of-the-barrel.

But also not high earners.

Just ordinary working families looking for long-term housing stability.

That combination of affordability, cash flow, stability, and property quality is becoming increasingly difficult to find elsewhere.

Perhaps the most attractive aspect of Kansas City is the number of working-class neighborhoods that continue to improve year after year.

Homes are being renovated.

Infrastructure is improving.

Owner-occupiers are moving in.

Local businesses are opening.

The housing stock is improving.

Those trends are exactly what I’m looking for as a long-term investor.

That doesn’t mean every neighborhood is a good investment.

Far from it.

Kansas City is still a street-by-street market.

There are neighborhoods I actively target and others I avoid entirely.

Even in the neighborhoods I invest in, you’ll still encounter the occasional late rent payment and property management challenge.

But investing is about probabilities, not certainties.

And in my experience, the probability of long-term success is significantly higher in markets with these characteristics.

If you take the time to understand the street-by-street neighborhood dynamics, build a reliable team, and focus on quality assets, Kansas City remains one of my favourite cash flow rental property markets in the United States.

Cleveland, Ohio

Cleveland has quietly been one of the best-performing rental property markets in the United States over the last decade.

I’ve done some great deals in Cleveland. I’ve also lost money there, too.

While Cleveland doesn’t receive the same attention as markets like Dallas, Austin, Tampa, or Phoenix, many of those markets experienced dramatic booms and corrections.

Cleveland has however has consistently delivered something I personally value much more:

Steady appreciation.

Strong rental demand.

Excellent rent-to-price ratios.

And some of the best housing affordability in the country.

Today, it’s still possible to purchase a fully renovated three-bedroom rental property in many Cleveland neighborhoods for around $150,000 and rent it for approximately $1,400 to $1,600 per month.

That combination is becoming increasingly difficult to find elsewhere.

In fact, I just helped a German client buy his first rental property in Cleveland.

He pruchased 3 bedroom property in the Detroit Shorewat neighborhood. He paid $150,000 against an appraised value of $160,000, and the house is rented at $1,500/mo.

That’s a solid deal!

But Cleveland is also one of those places where local knowledge matters. Like, really matters.

Why?

Because Cleveland is a tale of two markets.

Generally speaking, the west side of the city tends to offer better neighborhoods, lower vacancy rates, and a more stable tenant base.

The east side contains some pockets that are improving, but it’s also where you’ll find rampant crime, deteriorating neghborhoods, and an often problematic tenant base.

That’s why properties are cheap on the east side.

Unfortunately, that’s also why those are often the exact properties that are the biggest problems.

Because they’re cheap, the numbers look fantastic.

The reality however is very different.

I’ve spoken to countless investors who purchased properties because the projected returns looked amazing, only to find themselves dealing with constant turnover, vacancies, major repairs, delinquent rent, and ongoing property management headaches.

Five years later, many have put more money into the property than it’s actually worth.

In more than 10 years of building relationships in this industry, I’ve met very few investors who bought in these types of neighborhoods and still owned those properties five years later.

That’s why I focus on higher-quality neighborhoods and fully renovated properties.

Also, Cleveland’s housing stock is old.

Very old.

Many homes were built between the late 1890’s and 1950’s, so you’re delaing with aging plumbing, electrical systems, furnaces, roofs, and sewer lines.

If you buy a property that hasn’t been thoroughly updated, you’re essentially just buying a probelms from someone.

That’s why I generally prefer properties where the major systems have already been updated, even if it means paying a little more upfront.

Alternatively, I need to buy at a price that allows me to complete the work without my total investment exceeding the finished value of the property.

But here’s thing…

…a new roof, furnace, HVAC, and sewer line, along with updated electrics and plumbing will cost you upwards of $60,000 at the low end.

If we’re talking about a $100,000 house, you’ve got to be buying for less than $40,000 just to break even.

One area where investors need to be particularly careful in Cleveland is property taxes.

Cleveland properties can look extremely attractive on paper, but property tax reassessments can dramatically change the economics of a deal.

I’ve seen investors underwrite properties using the current tax bill, only to discover that taxes increased substantially after a sale or renovation.

In some cases, the increase was large enough to eliminate most, all, or even more than the projected cash flow.

So if you’re thinking of investing in Cleveland, you need to underwrite future property taxes, not just current property taxes.

That said, for investors who understand the neighborhoods, maintain realistic expectations, and build a strong local team, Cleveland is still one of my favourite cash flow rental property markets in the United States.

The cash flow is strong.

The affordability is excellent.

The financing works well with foreign national DSCR loans.

Get the neighborhood right, buy a property with good major systems, and hire a great property manager, and Cleveland can be a great long-term rental market.

Baltimore, Maryland (My Wild Card Market)

If Kansas City represents stability and Cleveland represents opportunity, Baltimore is my wild card.

It’s not a market I recommend to everyone. And disclaimer, i don’t own rpoperties in Baltimore. But I know a few very experienced and successful investor who do, and I’m serioulsy considering it.

Here’s thing. We talked about both Kansas City and Cleveland being street-to-street when it comes to neghborhood quality.

Baltimore is probably one of the most neighborhood-sensitive markets I’ve ever looked at.

Get the location wrong and you can create a lot of problems for yourself.

Get it right and the upside can be significant.

For decades, Baltimore struggled with many of the issues that investors typically try to avoid.

High crime.

Large numbers of vacant homes.

Population decline.

Disinvestment.

And that’s precisely why the market interests me today.

Because over the last several years, we’ve started to see meaningful change.

Local government, private investors, and community organisations have invested heavily in reducing vacancy, renovating housing stock, and bringing neighborhoods back to life.

Many of the neighborhoods I’m watching today look very different from how they looked ten years ago.

Vacant homes are being renovated.

Families are moving back in.

Homeownership is increasing.

And the quality of the housing stock is improving.

One organization I follow has reportedly reduced vacancy rates by more than 90% in several neighborhoods by acquiring, renovating, and returning abandoned homes to productive use.

What makes Baltimore even more interesting to me is that much of the housing stock is incredibly durable.

Unlike many parts of the United States, Baltimore is filled with traditional brick-built row homes.

They’re solid.

They’re practical.

They take far less maintenance and capex than traditional wooden framed homes.

And when properly renovated, they can make excellent long-term rental properties.

The pricing is attractive too.

Today it’s still possible to purchase a renovated three-bedroom row home for approximately $150,000 to $160,000.

Those same properties often rent for $1,500 to $1,700 per month.

From a cash-flow perspective, the numbers can work very well.

What I find most compelling, however, isn’t the current cash flow.

It’s the possibility that some of these improving neighborhoods are still early in their transformation.

That’s where I think the real opportunity may be.

The opportunity isn’t in today’s cash flow (although that’s still very decent), it’s in the possibility that these neighborhoods look very different in ten years’ time.

That said, Baltimore is not a beginner’s market.

Even more than Cleveland, your success or failure will likely come down to neighborhood selection.

In some parts of the city, vacancy rates are still high, crime is a problem, and investment activity is pretty limited.

A few streets away, you’ll find active renovation projects, rising owner-occupancy, and a completely different investment outlook.

That’s why local knowledge matters so much here.

Unfortunately, Baltimore became one of the favourite hunting grounds for some of the overseas property investment companies I mentioned earlier.

Many of them sold the cheapest properties they could find because the projected returns looked fantastic.

The reality turned out very different.

These properties were in the worst neighborhoods.

And to that the fact that a lot of them were sold pre-renovation, and in many cases the seller just ran off with the renovation budget.

The investors were left with vacant properties in very poor condition in the worst neighborhoods that they paid far too much money for!

So, buyer beware!

Be careful who you’re delaing with, and make sure to do your due dilignce on the seller, neighborhood, and property.

But still think that if you’re prepared do the work, Baltimore offers something increasingly difficult to find in today’s market:

Affordable housing.

Strong rent-to-price ratios.

Improving neighborhoods.

And the potential for long-term appreciation driven by genuine neighborhood revitalisation.

That’s why it remains one of the most interesting markets I’m watching today.

Final Thoughts

If you’ve read this far, you may have noticed that I never once claimed Kansas City, Cleveland, or Baltimore were the “best” cash flow rental property markets in America.

That’s because I don’t believe such a thing exists.

The best market for one investor can be a terrible market for another.

And over the past decade, I’ve seen plenty of great deals in ‘bad’ markets, as well as my fair share of terrible deals in whatever the latest “hotspot” happened to be.

What matters is understanding the risks, understanding the neighborhoods, building a reliable team, and buying quality assets.

If there’s one lesson I’ve learned after buying, renovating, financing, refinancing, and managing more than 120 rental properties, it’s this:

The cheapest property is rarely the best investment.

The highest projected return is rarely the safest investment.

And the best opportunities are often found where quality, affordability, cash flow, and long-term stability come together.

That’s the approach I use today.

It’s far slower than the strategy I used to build my original portfolio.

It’s certainly less exciting.

But it’s also far more sustainable.

And after everything I’ve experienced over the last decade, that’s exactly what I’m looking for.

I hope you’ve found this guide useful.

And if you’re considering investing in U.S. rental property from overseas, I hope some of the mistakes I made can help you avoid making the same ones.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the highest cash flow rental market always the best investment?

Not necessarily. In my experience, the highest cash flow rental properties often come with the highest operational risk. Many of the properties producing the highest projected returns are located in lower-quality neighborhoods with higher vacancy rates, more turnover, increased maintenance costs, and a more challenging tenant base. I generally prefer a property that produces slightly less cash flow but attracts stable long-term tenants and requires less day-to-day management.

How do I evaluate a neighborhood if I live outside the United States?

Start by looking beyond city-level statistics. Review crime trends, vacancy rates, school quality, property values, owner-occupancy rates, and recent renovation activity. Speak with local property managers and ask where they would and would not invest their own money. Most importantly, remember that real estate is hyper-local. In many U.S. cities, the difference between a great investment and a poor investment can be just a few streets.

Should foreign investors focus on appreciation or cash flow?

Ideally, both. I generally avoid markets that rely entirely on appreciation and also avoid properties that produce extremely high cash flow at the expense of neighborhood quality. My preferred investments offer positive cash flow from day one while also being located in neighborhoods with long-term growth potential. Over time, the combination of cash flow, mortgage amortization, and appreciation can be very powerful.

Why do some foreign investors lose money in U.S. rental property despite buying below market value?

Because the purchase price is only one part of the equation. Many investors underestimate vacancy, turnover, maintenance, capital expenditure, property management challenges, and future property tax increases. A property can look like a bargain at purchase and still become a poor investment if the neighborhood, tenant base, or condition of the property creates ongoing operational problems.

What is the biggest mistake foreign investors make when choosing a U.S. market?

Focusing on the city instead of the neighborhood. Many investors choose a market because it appears on a “best cities to invest” list without understanding the local neighborhoods. In my experience, neighborhood quality has a much greater impact on investment performance than city-level statistics. A great neighborhood in an average city will often outperform a poor neighborhood in a popular investment market.