Lincoln (KS) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

In Lincoln County, investors hold a significant 32.3% of the single-family residential market, owning 343 out of 1,061 total SFR properties.

Ownership is heavily skewed towards individual investors, who own 296 properties, or 86.3% of the investor-owned portfolio. Company investors hold the remaining 48 properties (14.0%).

This individual dominance is also reflected in the entity count, where 292 of the 337 total landlords (86.6%) are individuals rather than companies.

A standout feature of this market is the financing strategy: 100% of the 343 investor-owned properties are held as cash assets, with no properties reported as financed. This indicates a market of debt-free ownership among landlords.

The portfolio is clearly rental-focused, with 331 of the 343 properties classified as rented, confirming that 96.5% of investor holdings are actively used as rental housing.

There was a complete absence of landlord purchasing activity in Lincoln County during Q4 2025, resulting in no available data for acquisition pricing.

Due to the lack of transactions, it is not possible to compare landlord purchase prices to those of traditional homeowners for the recent quarter.

Similarly, analysis of pricing trends from earlier periods, such as 2020-2023, is not feasible as the data shows zero properties were acquired by landlords during that timeframe as well.

This lack of pricing data is a direct indicator of an extremely illiquid and inactive market for investor acquisitions in Lincoln County.

Without transactions, key metrics like the landlord discount, price appreciation, and quarter-over-quarter price changes cannot be calculated, pointing to a stagnant investment environment.

Investor purchasing in Lincoln County came to a complete standstill in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring zero new SFR properties.

This lack of activity means that the investor share of the market's 0 total Q4 purchases was 0.0%, indicating a market-wide halt, not just an investor retreat.

No new landlords entered the market, as the single-property (Tier 01) category recorded zero new entities and zero property acquisitions.

Activity was nonexistent across all investor sizes, with mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) and institutional investors alike purchasing zero properties.

The data points to a frozen acquisitions market, where no capital was deployed by any segment of the real estate investor community during the fourth quarter.

The investor landscape in Lincoln County is unequivocally controlled by small-scale operators, with mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) owning 92.3% of all investor-held SFRs.

First-time or single-property investors (Tier 01) form the bedrock of this market, holding 255 properties, which constitutes a 73.1% majority of the entire investor portfolio.

Mid-size landlords are a minor segment, with the 11-20 property tier holding 26 properties (7.4% of the total).

The market shows a complete absence of large-scale institutional investment, with the 1000+ property tier (Tier 09) owning 0.0% of the properties.

Due to the lack of recent transaction activity, it is not possible to analyze how acquisition prices vary by tier or if buying patterns have evolved over time.

In Lincoln County, individual investors maintain majority ownership across every single investor tier, a clear sign that corporate ownership has not penetrated the market at any scale.

There is no crossover point where companies become the dominant owner type. Individuals hold an 86.7% share of single-property portfolios and a 70.6% share in the 3-5 property tier.

The dominance of individuals is absolute in several tiers; they own 100.0% of the properties held by landlords with two properties (31 properties) and those with 6-10 properties (2 properties).

Even as portfolios grow, individuals retain control. In the largest active tier (11-20 properties), individuals own 23 of the 26 properties, an 88.5% share.

The data confirms that the investor market structure in Lincoln County is built entirely around individual, small-scale ownership, with corporate entities playing a minimal role regardless of portfolio size.

Investor holdings in Lincoln County show significant geographic concentration, with three zip codes accounting for the majority of properties.

The zip code 67455 (Lincoln) is the epicenter of investor ownership by volume, containing 165 investor-owned properties, which represents a 25.9% ownership rate.

Following this, the 67481 (Sylvan Grove) zip code has 112 investor-owned properties, translating to a high ownership rate of 41.9%.

While smaller in total count, the 67418 (Barnard) zip code exhibits the highest investor penetration in the county, where investors own 46.4% of the single-family housing stock.

In contrast, the 67423 (Beverly) zip code also shows a high concentration with a 41.7% investor ownership rate from 40 properties, highlighting specific community-level investment focus.

The historical transaction data for Lincoln County is empty, revealing a market with extremely low or non-existent trading velocity among real estate investors.

Without any recorded buy or sell transactions, it's impossible to determine if landlords have historically been net buyers or sellers, suggesting a stable, buy-and-hold strategy is prevalent.

The absence of data also means that landlord-to-landlord transaction activity, a key indicator of market liquidity and maturity, is effectively zero.

This lack of transactional history applies to all investor types, including institutional players, who have no recorded trading activity in the region.

The primary insight from this data is the market's fundamental illiquidity, where investor-owned properties are rarely traded, distinguishing it from more dynamic, high-volume markets.

The fourth quarter of 2025 saw a complete cessation of real estate transactions in Lincoln County, with landlords participating in zero deals.

This brought the landlord share of all Q4 transactions to 0.0%, as the total market transaction volume was also zero.

As a result of this market-wide halt, there is no transaction data to compare across different investor tiers, from mom-and-pop to institutional.

Analysis of Q4 purchase prices by tier is not possible, as no properties were bought or sold by investors.

Similarly, metrics on inter-landlord trading cannot be assessed, reinforcing the picture of a completely inactive and illiquid market environment for the quarter.