Wrenfield Crossing Sec 3, Lot 22 · Sumner County, TN · demonstration record · 4,620 finished sq ft over two stories · built 2015 · 5 bedrooms, 4.5 baths · brick and stone · three-car side-entry garage · covered veranda overlooking the rear lawn
Sample condition notes: kitchen rebuilt in 2024 to a designer specification — custom cabinetry, stone counters and panel-ready appliances — the primary wing left as the home was built, roof and both HVAC systems from the original 2015 build. Those three facts are what place this sample home in the middle of its window rather than the top of it — 1121 Wrenfield Trace in the table below is what a full renovation was worth on this street.
Estate lot of 0.74 acres backing to the community walking trail. Every detail on this page is part of the demonstration — Wrenfield Trace and Wrenfield Crossing are not real places.
Built from the fourteen sample comparables below — a starting position for the market to answer, not a promised result. Demonstration figures throughout.
The comparables set the price. The calendar sets what is left of it, and your list price sets the odds of when. Two views of the same curve: the value frontier first, then the same calendar in net dollars.
Still unsold at each date below, this is the price the record still supports — measured from $1,850,000, the top of the recommended window, and from nothing else. That is deliberate: the number a seller pictures himself getting is the best one the comparables reached on day one, so that is the number the calendar is measured against here. These figures do not move with the list price above: they are what the calendar does, not what the ask does.
Vertical scale runs 85%–100% of day-one value, so the steps are readable; the printed dollars are the figures that matter.
Day 1: $1,850,000, and that number reads >95%. Day 30: $1,831,500 is the number still carrying that read, while the day-one figure has slipped to 75%. Day 90: $1,757,500 carries it, and the day-one number is down to 20%. Day 180: the number still carrying that read is $1,683,500, and the day-one figure reads 3%. That is the mirage, in this home's own numbers.
Two different questions, one engine. The staircase asks: still unsold at day d, what number still carries the same read from there. The tester below asks: priced at a number from day one, what are the odds of each date. A price can read strong as a launch and weak as a leftover — that is the point. The two also start from different figures on purpose: the staircase measures from $1,850,000, the top of the window, because the question is what the best day-one number is worth later; the net strip further down measures from the window midpoint, because the question there is what a contract actually nets, and netting the best case would flatter it. One decay curve, two starting figures, and both are printed.
The most expensive assumption in real estate is that the first number waits. The $1,850,000 a home could have drawn in its first two weeks is not parked somewhere, ready for the seller who comes down to it later. Buyer traffic is front-loaded10; by the time an ask has been walked down to the number that was available on day one, the listing carries a history every portal shows and every buyer reads, and the record says buyers read it as leverage34. The number did not wait. It left. That is the staircase above — and it is how listings end a first attempt cancelled or expired instead of closed: about half of Davidson County sellers in the first half of 2025 did not sell on the first try, and roughly one in five Middle Tennessee active listings this spring was a re-list of an earlier attempt16 — homes that carry a 155-day median cumulative clock once they come back7. It is not a local quirk either: nationally, 52.2% of active listings had passed 60 days without a contract this spring against a median of 39 days to sell1314. The choice is never “the same money later.” It is this number now, or that number then. We not only show you what your home is worth — we show you how we got there, and what the calendar does to it.
Studies place the effect of a long marketing period between roughly 3% and 12% of value by the six-month mark, depending on market, method and cycle151112. This curve sits mid-range and is checked against this comparable set's own record1. It is a stated, sourced allowance — calibrated to published research and to this market's own record — and not a measurement of this home. The causal half is the part sellers find hardest to believe: when one state's MLS began showing a listing's true cumulative days on market and its neighbour did not, otherwise-identical homes sold for roughly $11,000 to $21,500 less on the visible-staleness signal alone3. Nothing about those homes changed.
| Date | Share of day-one value | Decay | Worked example on $500,000 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Day 1 (launch) | 1.000 | — | $500,000 |
| Day 30 | 0.990 | −1.0% | $495,000 |
| Day 60 | 0.970 | −3.0% | $485,000 |
| Day 90 | 0.950 | −5.0% | $475,000 |
| Day 120 | 0.935 | −6.5% | $467,500 |
| Day 150 | 0.920 | −8.0% | $460,000 |
| Day 180 | 0.910 | −9.0% | $455,000 |
Between the dates the curve reads straight through, so a home sitting at day 105 lands at 94.3% — $471,250 on the $500,000 example, and $1,743,625 on this one. Day 14 is 100% by construction, which is why the day-14 reference point in the net strip below is unchanged. Confidence is well documented through day 90 and widens after it: the published range at six months runs from about 5% to about 12%, and this curve sits inside it rather than at either edge1552.
The dollar figures are the frontier — the price that still carries this comp set's own in-window read (>95% at the standard 60-day forward look) at each date. They are not a prediction of a sale price, not an appraisal, and not a statement about where this market is going. Re-price any step through the same surface at its own staleness and it returns that same read, which is the arithmetic check this card is built on.
The dollar figure in each column is what a contract on that date tends to net once carrying, staleness and concession drag are taken off $1,800,000 — and it does not change when you move the slider. What the slider changes is the chance of reaching each date under contract.
$1,800,000 is 100% of the midpoint of the recommended window ($1,800,000).
The arithmetic runs one direction: a longer marketing period spends money that a shorter one does not. That is the whole case for starting inside the window instead of testing a number above it — the 4,620 square feet do not change, only what the calendar costs and how likely each date becomes.
Enter any list price and pick a day. The card reports the odds of this home being under contract, at or above that price, by that day — the same engine and the same printed assumptions as the strip above.
Time on market is the visible cost. These are the quiet ones. There is give and take here — a higher list price buys risk, not money.
Before the chips: the customs of a Middle Tennessee closing are already inside every price in the comparables table. Here the seller customarily pays the buyer's-agent commission on almost every sale, and customarily pays the title charges on nearly all closings. Those are the customs of this market rather than a posture any list price changes, and every closed sale printed in this report settled with them in it — so the recommended window has them priced in already. What follows is the OTHER kind of concession, the kind that moves with the ask: closing-cost help, inspection repairs, rate buydowns, and the contingencies a thinner buyer pool brings with it. A chip reading “Low” never means a seller pays nothing at closing; it means the negotiated extras on top of the customs stay small.
Reading the chips at $1,800,000 — inside the recommended window. Move the list price above and every chip re-reads.
This chip is about the variable concession only — cash toward the buyer's closing costs or a rate buydown, on top of the customs every comparable already carries. A price inside the window is the position that produces competition rather than a negotiation with the only buyer who called, and competition is what keeps that credit off the table. In this sample record, 6 of the 13 closings carried a negotiated closing-cost concession — the MLS concession type, meaning closing-cost help, repair money or a rate buydown, and never the customary buyer's-agent commission or title charges. Of the eight homes that opened in line with the size line, one did. Of the five that opened above it, all five did, at $32,500 to $67,500.
Local count from the comparables pull behind this report, plus the industry pattern it illustrates. An MLS concession figure records the NEGOTIATED closing-cost type — money put toward the buyer's costs, repairs or a rate buydown. It does not include the customary buyer's-agent commission or the seller's customary title charges, which are already inside every closed price in the table.
Competition is what lets a seller decline a contingent offer and keep the shorter timeline — a choice that only exists when more than one buyer is at the table. In this sample record, the two winning offers that carried a home-to-sell condition both belonged to listings that had already passed 60 days on market.
Industry pattern, labelled as such. The MLS records a sale-of-home condition only where an agent wrote it into the remarks, so any count beside it is a floor, not a rate.
Repair lists can easily run into five figures — $15,000 is not unusual. Priced to draw competing offers, that line often disappears: sellers regularly get as-is acceptance, or negotiate the repairs down to a minimum, because a buyer who knows they are competing asks for less. The inspection report is the same document either way; the leverage is not. In this sample record, three of the five homes that opened above the size line paid repair money inside their concession figure. None of the five that went under contract within nine days did, and 1035 Wrenfield Trace was accepted in as-is condition after competing offers.
The five-figure repair list and the as-is outcome under competition are our team's practice knowledge from our own transactions, phrased as what happens often rather than as a measured rate. The MLS carries no separate repair-credit field: negotiated repair money is recorded inside the concession figure, which is the closing-cost type and never the customary commission or title charges.
A contract that ends sends the home back to market carrying its own history, visible on every portal. Pricing to the window is what keeps the first contract from being the fragile one. In this sample record, one address made the trip twice: 1066 Wrenfield Trace lost a contract after the inspection, returned to market, and closed 103 days from launch at $165,000 under its opening ask.
Local count from the comparables pull behind this report.
An appraiser opens the same kind of file this report is built from — these closed comparables, adjusted the same way. Inside the window every dollar of the number has a closing behind it to read.
Every count above is read off the fourteen demonstration records printed in the table below — this is a sample property, so the record is the demonstration set itself and nothing more. On a real listing these lines carry counts from the MLS pull behind your own neighborhood. A lender's appraisal is a separate exercise, built from closed comparables like the ones printed here. Where an appraisal reads below the contract price, renegotiation follows in up to 80% of cases, and the share rises as the gap widens9.
Read the five together and they make one point. Pricing to the record does not only shorten the calendar — it buys negotiating leverage on every other line of the deal: the credit, the repair list, the contingency, the closing date. Competition is that leverage, and the list price is what creates it or spends it.
The five levels above are labelled judgments that move with the list price, and they carry no percentage of their own on purpose — a comparables set this size cannot support a risk percentage, and a made-up one would be worse than none. Lines marked as an industry pattern are exactly that, and are not measurements of this home; lines marked as our team's practice knowledge describe what we see often in our own transactions and are not a statistic either. The customary items named in the baseline paragraph are described as customary on purpose — no share or percentage is claimed for them anywhere in this report. Nothing here is a statement about what any particular buyer or contract does.
Illustration, not a promise — every home and every market moment differs. These figures are arithmetic on the assumptions above, and this paragraph covers the value staircase at the top of this card exactly as it covers the net strip: both read the same stated, sourced allowance. They are not an appraisal, not a valuation of this home, not a statement about where the market is going, and no timeline or dollar figure here is a commitment about this property. Change any assumption with your agent and the whole card changes with it.
Fourteen sample comparables — thirteen closed and one under contract — all inside the demonstration subdivision, ordered by price per square foot. The concession figures in the notes are the NEGOTIATED kind (closing-cost help, repair money, rate buydowns); the customary items of a Middle Tennessee closing are inside every closed price already and are never itemised here.
| Address | Status | Closed | Price | Sq Ft | $/Sq Ft | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1121 Wrenfield Trace 5 bd · 5 ba |
Sold | Jan 16, 2026 | $2,100,000 | 4,650 | $452 | The renovated benchmark of the sample set and the top of the record once size is accounted for: full designer kitchen, rebuilt primary suite, new roof, new HVAC, pool and covered outdoor living room. $452 per sq ft — about $62 above the size line — and four days on market. No concession. |
| 1054 Wrenfield Trace 4 bd · 3.5 ba |
Sold | May 8, 2026 | $1,510,000 | 3,680 | $410 | Smallest home in the sample set and the highest ordinary-condition rate per foot at $410 — the clearest illustration of the size gradient. Under contract the day it listed. No concession. |
| 1108 Wrenfield Trace 4 bd · 3.5 ba |
Sold | Jun 13, 2025 | $1,550,000 | 3,800 | $408 | Opened on the line and closed $5,000 above the first ask in three days at $408 per sq ft. Original kitchen, newer tankless water heaters. No concession. |
| 218 Kestrel Hollow Ct 4 bd · 3.5 ba |
Sold | Mar 20, 2026 | $1,690,000 | 4,240 | $399 | Closed within $5,000 of its opening ask after 19 days at $399 per sq ft. Level fenced yard, covered terrace, original baths. No concession. |
| 1035 Wrenfield Trace 5 bd · 4 ba |
Sold | Jun 26, 2026 | $1,775,000 | 4,530 | $392 | Competing offers, highest-and-best called, closed $20,000 above the opening ask in five days at $392 per sq ft. Accepted in as-is condition after the inspection — the sample set's clearest picture of what competition does to a repair list. No concession. |
| 1129 Wrenfield Trace 5 bd · 4.5 ba |
Sold | Feb 27, 2026 | $1,800,000 | 4,610 | $390 | The nearest match on size anywhere in the sample set — ten square feet off the subject — and the single most useful line in this table. Opened on the line, closed $5,000 above it in nine days at $390 per sq ft. No concession. |
| 226 Kestrel Hollow Ct 5 bd · 4 ba |
Sold | Sep 19, 2025 | $1,845,000 | 4,780 | $386 | Twenty-two days on market and $5,000 under the opening ask at $386 per sq ft. Bonus suite over the three-car garage, original kitchen. No concession. |
| 310 Harrowgate Way 5 bd · 4.5 ba |
Sold | Nov 7, 2025 | $2,015,000 | 5,390 | $374 | The largest home to open in line with the size line, and it still took 41 days — size narrows the buyer pool on its own, even at this price point. Closed $10,000 above the opening ask at $374 per sq ft, with $20,000 in negotiated closing-cost help. |
| 1017 Wrenfield Trace 5 bd · 4 ba |
Sold | Mar 28, 2025 | $1,737,500 | 4,430 | $392 | Opened at $1,885,000, about $138,000 above what the size line supported, and closed 78 days later at $1,737,500 — $392 per sq ft. $32,500 in negotiated closing-cost help on top. |
| 1090 Wrenfield Trace 5 bd · 4.5 ba |
Sold | Aug 15, 2025 | $1,785,000 | 4,715 | $379 | The widest opening gap in the sample set: $1,995,000 against a size line at about $1,830,000. Ninety-six days, two price reductions, closed at $379 per sq ft with $45,000 in negotiated concessions covering closing costs and post-inspection repair money. The winning offer was written contingent on the buyer selling a home of their own. |
| 240 Kestrel Hollow Ct 5 bd · 4.5 ba |
Sold | Apr 17, 2026 | $1,940,000 | 5,100 | $380 | Opened about $133,000 above the line, closed 64 days later at $380 per sq ft with $37,500 in negotiated concessions — part closing-cost help, part rate buydown for the buyer. |
| 1066 Wrenfield Trace 4 bd · 3.5 ba |
Sold | Nov 22, 2024 | $1,650,000 | 4,080 | $404 | The cautionary line of the sample set. Opened at $1,815,000, well above the size line for 4,080 sq ft; a first contract ended after the inspection; back on market and closed 103 days from launch at $1,650,000 — $165,000 under the opening ask — with $57,500 in negotiated concessions covering repairs and closing costs. |
| 302 Harrowgate Way 6 bd · 5 ba |
Sold | May 30, 2025 | $2,065,000 | 5,660 | $365 | Largest home in the sample set, opened about $130,000 above the line, and took 121 days. Closed at $365 per sq ft with $67,500 in negotiated concessions — closing-cost help plus a repair credit written after the inspection. The accepted offer also carried a home-to-sell condition. |
| 205 Kestrel Hollow Ct 4 bd · 3.5 ba |
Under contract | — | $1,610,000 | 3,940 | $409 | The one live data point in the sample set — under contract in 14 days at its opening ask, $409 per sq ft on 3,940 sq ft. A list price rather than a closing, so it informs the line without setting it. |
Why the window sits where it does, comp by comp
Sample assessor record — on a real analysis this is your county's actual record; here it is part of the demonstration
Open items that tighten the number before the sign goes in the yard — confirmed in person before a listing ever goes live, never a hurdle to seeing your report
The decay curve in this report is calibrated to the published research below and checked against this market's own record — the comparables printed above. Every link opens the source.
Findings are quoted with their outlet and year as published; where a paper sits behind a paywall the link goes to its abstract or mirror page, which is what a reader can open. Nothing is cited here that we could not verify at the source, and figures we could not trace to a primary source were left out of this report rather than rounded into it. Entries without a link are our own arithmetic — the comparables table above, and our own reading of the regional MLS record — and are labelled as ours wherever they appear.
How to read this analysis. This is a SAMPLE analysis of a property that does not exist. The address, subdivision, county record and all fourteen comparables were invented to demonstrate how the tool works, and no figure here describes a real home, a real closing or a real market. A real analysis is prepared from dated actuals — closed sales pulled for a specific address — and arithmetic on them. Even then it is not an appraisal, not a promise of a sale price, and not a forecast of the market. Equal Housing Opportunity.