Kansas City vs Chicago

[Account Closed]

Greetings,

I've been exploring a few different hybrid markets for an out of state investment (considering possibly a turnkey property). So far, I'm deciding between Kansas City and Chicago. 

From my research:

- Kansas City have a lower population and lower home prices

- Chicago have a higher population and higher home prices

- Kansas City currently have about a 5.74% vacancy rate but as recently as 7 to 12 years ago, a 10.58-12.40% vacancy rate (source: http://www.deptofnumbers.com/rent/missouri/kansas-... )

- Chicago currently have about a 5.22% vacancy rate, trending downwards from 9.26% in 2005 ( http://www.deptofnumbers.com/rent/illinois/chicago... )

Was wondering if anyone have any strong opinions about investing in one city or the other? As a side note, I've also considered Memphis which appears at the moment to be a stable market with a lower rate of appreciation, but my only concern is that the appreciation may not catch up with inflation and the city appears to have the highest vacancy rate of the three markets described at the time of this post.

All inputs are welcome and greatly appreciated :)

[Snehann Kapnadak]

Something also worth considering are the landlord-tenant laws and how friendly the city is to home owners. Kansas City (MO, not sure about KS) is landlord friendly and has a relatively swift eviction process. Not sure about Chicago but I think there was a BP podcast episode where Bree Schmidt mentioned that it's Chicago isn't very landlord friendly. But I could be wrong.

Hope that helps in your decision making process. Good luck!