Water markets aren't typically (maybe there are some?) aimed at individuals, they're aimed at commercial users (farms, power plants, data centers, factories).
For example, see the : https://youtu.be/druiwE_GjRI?t=559 and the last section where they talk about waste.
Pricing encourages factories to do things like recycle water on site.
How do you feel about land? Zoning restrictions, property taxes, etc?
So, for property, well, is all the property owned by one entity? If there's one bank that owns all the farmland, that's not a competitive market for farmland.
Water is like electricity is like fiber optic routes, however, and those should be public utilities - but the equipment they need to build and maintain those systems should be provided by the private sector, in a competitive bidding manner.
In the case of a municipality, and in thinking of landownership as a "bundle of rights" such as water rights, air rights, mineral rights, development rights, leasing rights, etc... So many of those rights are controlled by the local municipal authority.
For example, suppose that after a natural disaster some people are left without water and without power. It makes perfect sense to load some water bottles into a truck and drive over there to help them, but it would be very impractical to load a truck with enough batteries to make even a tiny bit of difference.
"One interesting idea that has emerged in dry places (notably Australia and Israel) is water markets. These make sense on a pretty basic level: if something is scarce and valuable, I should be able to buy, sell, and speculate on it."
Given that water is a fundamental necessity, it's supply should not be subject to rigged markets and monopolistic pricing, which is the norm when private investors try to take over natural monopolies (i.e. there's no 'competition' in water supply systems, rather like electricity markets.)