Columbia, SC: 2-bedroom payment standards across 60 ZIP codes
HUD's FY2026 Small Area Fair Market Rents for Columbia, SC HUD Metro FMR Area range from $1,020 to $1,840 for a 2-bedroom. The 90th-percentile ZIP code runs 1.29× the 10th — a gap of $343 a month — which ranks 169th widest of the 247 HUD metro areas we compare.
median 2-bedroom SAFMR across the area's 60 ZIP codes. Where a housing authority sets a single metro-wide standard, it could reach $1,452 at 110%.
monthly gap between the 90th- and 10th-percentile ZIP code ($1,170 to $1,513).
of the area's ZIP codes (9 of 60) sit above $1,452 — 110% of the area median.
Highest-rent ZIP codes in Columbia, SC
Every ZIP code, ranked
The payment-standard column is HUD's published 90–110% band for that ZIP code — the range a housing authority may adopt without HUD approval. Your PHA sets the exact figure. The final column compares each ZIP to the area median; ZIP codes marked above 110% exceed 110% of that median — where a housing authority sets a single area-wide standard, those sit above the highest ceiling basic policy reaches.
| # | ZIP code | 2 BR SAFMR ▾ | Payment standard (90–110%) | vs area median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 29177 | $1,840 | $1,656–$2,024 | above 110% |
| 2 | 29229 | $1,770 | $1,593–$1,947 | above 110% |
| 3 | 29063 | $1,730 | $1,557–$1,903 | above 110% |
| 4 | 29201 | $1,720 | $1,548–$1,892 | above 110% |
| 5 | 29208 | $1,720 | $1,548–$1,892 | above 110% |
| 6 | 29225 | $1,720 | $1,548–$1,892 | above 110% |
| 7 | 29206 | $1,490 | $1,341–$1,639 | above 110% |
| 8 | 29061 | $1,460 | $1,314–$1,606 | above 110% |
| 9 | 29212 | $1,460 | $1,314–$1,606 | above 110% |
| 10 | 29033 | $1,430 | $1,287–$1,573 | 108% |
| 11 | 29072 | $1,430 | $1,287–$1,573 | 108% |
| 12 | 29016 | $1,410 | $1,269–$1,551 | 107% |
| 13 | 29209 | $1,390 | $1,251–$1,529 | 105% |
| 14 | 29223 | $1,390 | $1,251–$1,529 | 105% |
| 15 | 29210 | $1,360 | $1,224–$1,496 | 103% |
| 16 | 29205 | $1,340 | $1,206–$1,474 | 102% |
| 17 | 29207 | $1,330 | $1,197–$1,463 | 101% |
| 18 | 29002 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 19 | 29202 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 20 | 29211 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 21 | 29215 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 22 | 29216 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 23 | 29217 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 24 | 29218 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 25 | 29220 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 26 | 29221 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 27 | 29222 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 28 | 29224 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 29 | 29226 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 30 | 29227 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 31 | 29230 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 32 | 29240 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 33 | 29250 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 34 | 29260 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 35 | 29290 | $1,320 | $1,188–$1,452 | 100% |
| 36 | 29214 | $1,270 | $1,143–$1,397 | 96% |
| 37 | 29203 | $1,250 | $1,125–$1,375 | 95% |
| 38 | 29071 | $1,220 | $1,098–$1,342 | 92% |
| 39 | 29169 | $1,220 | $1,098–$1,342 | 92% |
| 40 | 29171 | $1,220 | $1,098–$1,342 | 92% |
| 41 | 29014 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 42 | 29015 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 43 | 29044 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 44 | 29052 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 45 | 29053 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 46 | 29054 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 47 | 29055 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 48 | 29065 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 49 | 29073 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 50 | 29123 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 51 | 29166 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 52 | 29170 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 53 | 29172 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 54 | 29180 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 55 | 29204 | $1,170 | $1,053–$1,287 | 89% |
| 56 | 29105 | $1,110 | $999–$1,221 | 84% |
| 57 | 29006 | $1,020 | $918–$1,122 | 77% |
| 58 | 29129 | $1,020 | $918–$1,122 | 77% |
| 59 | 29824 | $1,020 | $918–$1,122 | 77% |
| 60 | 29832 | $1,020 | $918–$1,122 | 77% |
How Columbia, SC compares
Its internal spread of 1.29× (p90 ÷ p10) ranks 169 of 247 HUD metro FMR areas, against a median of 1.37× and a national high of 1.77×. On the steadier p75 ÷ p25 measure it is 1.15×. See the full ranking and how it was measured →
A note on what this does not mean: a higher payment standard does not increase the assistance a household receives. It raises the ceiling on the rent a voucher can cover, while the household still pays roughly 30% of adjusted income. Figures are ZIP-weighted, not renter-weighted, and rest on 2019–2023 American Community Survey data trended forward.