Cedar Park Real Estate (Austin, 2026)

Cedar Park is a suburb-city within the Austin metro, comprising 22 census tracts and a total population of 95,056. The population-weighted median home value sits at $495,300, and the Verus-AI model assigns a mean score of 60.59 across all 22 scored tracts, with a median score of 62.5. Those two figures are close enough to suggest a roughly symmetric distribution in the middle of the range, though the presence of a single F-grade tract at the low end and a score ceiling of 78 at the high end introduces modest negative skew.

The mean 5-year forecast of 33.51% across Cedar Park tracts reflects a market the model characterizes as moderately constructive, though that average is pulled downward by a small number of outlier tracts whose forecasts diverge sharply from the modal value. In practical terms, the upper half of the distribution is compressed at a single value, and the dispersion that does exist is concentrated entirely in the lower tail.

Within the 22 tracts, individual current home values range from $295,698 for tract 48491020325 to $824,938 for tract 48491020347, a spread of roughly $529,000 that reflects meaningful within-city heterogeneity. That range is wider than a single median figure would imply, and it matters for yield analysis: tracts at the upper end of the value spectrum tend to carry rent-to-price ratios well below those at the lower end, a structural feature discussed further in the scoring section below. Cedar Park carries no Opportunity Zone designations across any of its 22 tracts, which removes one layer of tax-incentive complexity from the analysis.

The grade distribution across Cedar Park's 22 tracts is weighted toward the middle of the scale. Two tracts earn a B, three earn a B-, three earn a C+, six earn a C, two earn a C-, three earn a D+, two earn a D, and one earns an F. No tract reaches an A or A- grade. The score distribution runs from a minimum of 29 to a maximum of 78 on the 100-point Verus-AI scale, with the 10th percentile at 46.5 and the 90th percentile at 72.8. That 26.3-point spread between the 10th and 90th percentiles indicates meaningful dispersion even before accounting for the single outlier at 29.

The leading tract, 48491020354, scores 78 and carries a B grade with a Moderate risk designation. Its current value of $449,800 is well below the city's highest-valued tracts, and its rent-to-price ratio of 5.64% is among the more favorable readings in the ranked table. Its income year-over-year figure of 12.2% is the strongest income growth reading among the 22 tracts shown in the ranked table, and its 5-year forecast of 37.01% implies a model-projected value of $616,265 by 2029. The forecast chart for this leading tract illustrates how the 80% confidence band widens materially over the forecast horizon: the terminal lower band sits at $475,004 and the terminal upper band at $799,536, a width of $324,532 by 2029. Readers should treat the point forecast as a central tendency, not a precise outcome.

A structural pattern visible in the ranked table below is the inverse relationship between current home value and rent-to-price yield. Tract 48491020347, with the highest current value among all 22 ranked tracts at $824,938, carries a rent-to-price ratio of only 2.75%. By contrast, tract 48491020325, with a current value of $295,698, carries a ratio of 8.84%, the widest yield reading in the ranked table. This pattern is consistent with price appreciation having outpaced rental income growth in the upper value tier, and it suggests that yield-oriented analysis and appreciation-oriented analysis may point toward different tracts within the same city.

Risk designations add a further dimension. Of the 22 scored tracts, 14 carry Low or Moderate risk designations, while 6 carry Elevated and 2 carry High. The two High-risk tracts are 48491020335 and 48491020347; notably, 48491020347 is also the highest-valued tract in the set, pairing a premium price point with an elevated risk profile. Nine tracts carry a Moderate risk designation, including the top-ranked tract 48491020354.

The single F-grade tract, 48491020346, scores 29 on the Verus-AI scale, 33.5 points below the market median of 62.5 among the 22 tracts shown in the ranked table, and carries a 5-year forecast of only 10.18%, implying a model-projected value of $529,626 against a current value of $480,700. Its income year-over-year figure is 0.0%, and its risk designation is Moderate, which is an unusual combination: the model's risk grade does not fully capture the score weakness, suggesting the drag comes from other structural inputs. Among the five lowest-ranked tracts, four, 48491020356, 48491020349, 48491020353, and 48491020348, show negative income year-over-year figures. The sharpest income decline among all 22 scored Cedar Park tracts belongs to tract 48491020348, at -19.71%, and that same tract also carries a 5-year forecast of 37.01%, a divergence that illustrates how the model weights multiple inputs rather than treating income momentum as determinative on its own.

The four are Hutto (similarity 98.9%, Verus-AI score 83, current value $505,700), Buda (similarity 97.8%, score 78, current value $502,009), Leander (similarity 97.5%, score 77, current value $393,400), and Pflugerville (similarity 97.7%, score 72, current value $404,172). All four similarity readings exceed 97%, indicating that the model regards these as structurally close peers rather than loose proxies.

The comparison suggests that Cedar Park's within-city dispersion, particularly the drag from its lower-scoring tracts, is suppressing its aggregate standing relative to peers that may have tighter score distributions. Readers interested in a tract-level comparison to any of the four comparables can consult the linked profiles in the comparables table.

Current value comparisons are also instructive. Cedar Park's population-weighted median value of $495,300 is broadly in line with Hutto ($505,700) and Buda ($502,009) but meaningfully above Leander ($393,400) and Pflugerville ($404,172). Whether that premium persists or compresses over the 2025-2029 forecast window is a question the tract-level forecasts in the ranked table below can help frame.

All 22 Cedar Park tracts carry a climate rating, and the distribution skews favorably: 12 tracts are rated Very Low and 10 are rated Relatively Low. No tract in the scored set carries a Moderate, High, or Very High climate rating. The absence of any tract in an elevated climate risk category is a distinguishing feature relative to many other Austin-area geographies, though readers should note that climate ratings are model-derived estimates based on the history window of 2014-2024 and should not be interpreted as forward guarantees.

Cedar Park has zero Opportunity Zone-designated tracts across all 22 in the scored set. The absence of OZ designations means that the tax-incentive overlay that can complicate valuation and holding-period analysis in some suburban markets is not a factor here. For institutional investors whose mandates include or exclude OZ exposure, Cedar Park presents a clean profile on this dimension. The combination of favorable climate ratings and no OZ designations simplifies the overlay analysis, though it also removes a potential source of tax-advantaged return that some comparable markets may offer.

The Verus-AI score is computed on a 0-to-100 scale and summarizes a tract's investment profile across multiple model inputs, including home value trends, income dynamics, rent-to-price yield, and risk overlays. Scores are calibrated against a history window of 2014-2024 and the forecast window covers 2025-2029, a 5-year horizon. All forecasts are model-derived estimates; they are not appraisals, broker opinions, or guaranteed outcomes.

Confidence bands on the forecast chart are 80% intervals, meaning the model assigns an 80% probability that the realized value will fall within the displayed range. For the leading tract, 48491020354, the terminal 80% band spans $475,004 to $799,536 by 2029, a width of $324,532. That width grows from $111,804 in the first forecast year to $324,532 in the fifth, reflecting the compounding uncertainty inherent in any multi-year price forecast. Narrower bands in early years should not be read as precision; they reflect only the shorter compounding horizon.

A single-year income swing, such as the -19.71% reading for tract 48491020348 or the -16.29% reading for tract 48491020356, may reflect survey sampling variability in the American Community Survey rather than a structural deterioration in household finances.

The ranked table and forecast chart render alongside this prose and contain the full tract-level detail. Readers are encouraged to consult those tables directly rather than relying solely on the summary statistics in this text. Scores, forecasts, and risk designations are point-in-time outputs of the Verus-AI model and will be updated as new data becomes available. No overlay analysis in this publication constitutes a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any specific asset.