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

Investor ownership in Rush County, KS is exceptionally high, with landlords holding 693 of the 1,307 Single-Family Residential properties, a market penetration of 53.0%.

The market is overwhelmingly dominated by individual investors, who own 594 properties, comprising 85.7% of the entire investor-owned portfolio. Company investors hold the remaining 101 properties (14.6%).

A defining characteristic of this market is its complete reliance on cash. All 693 investor-owned SFRs are held free and clear, with zero properties financed, suggesting a market of low-cost assets or highly liquid investors.

The investor base itself reflects this individual dominance, with 751 individual landlords compared to just 56 company entities operating in the county.

The portfolio is heavily geared towards rental income, with 683 properties (98.6%) classified as rented or non-owner-occupied, underscoring the business focus of these holdings.

The Rush County real estate market shows a complete absence of recent sales activity, with no acquisitions recorded for either landlords or traditional homeowners in Q4 2025.

This lack of transactions makes it impossible to analyze current pricing trends, compare landlord versus homeowner acquisition costs, or assess any potential pricing gap for the quarter.

The absence of sales data itself is a significant insight, pointing to an extremely illiquid or stagnant market in the most recent period.

No pricing information is available for earlier quarters in 2025, further highlighting the market's low transaction volume.

The only available historical price data for landlords is an average of $53,552 from the 2020-2023 period, but even this is based on a recorded count of zero properties, rendering it a baseline without transactional backing in this dataset.

Investor acquisition activity in Rush County came to a complete halt in Q4 2025, with landlords purchasing zero properties.

This inactivity means landlords accounted for 0.0% of the total market share for purchases, as the total number of SFR purchases in the county was also zero.

All investor tiers, from new mom-and-pop landlords (Tier 01) to institutional investors (Tier 09), were inactive, with zero properties purchased across the board.

The data indicates no new entrants into the landlord market this quarter, as the number of new single-property entities was zero.

This lack of activity points to a deeply frozen market where no capital was deployed by real estate investors during the final quarter of 2025.

The investor landscape in Rush County is definitively controlled by small-scale operators, with mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) owning 655 properties, a commanding 93.7% share of all investor-owned SFRs.

First-time or single-holding investors (Tier 01) represent the largest segment by a wide margin, accounting for 513 properties, or 73.4% of the total investor portfolio.

The scale of ownership drops off sharply, with two-property landlords holding an 11.9% share, and those with 3-5 properties holding just 5.2%.

Mid-size and large investors have a negligible footprint. Landlords with 11-100 properties collectively own only 43 properties (6.1%).

There is zero institutional presence in Rush County, with the 1,000+ property tier (Tier 09) holding 0.0% of the market, underscoring its exclusively small-investor character.

Individual investors are the primary owners across all significant portfolio tiers in Rush County, reinforcing the market's mom-and-pop nature.

In the largest tier of single-property landlords, individuals own 474 of the 513 properties, a 92.0% share, compared to just 41 properties (8.0%) owned by companies.

This pattern continues in larger tiers; individuals own 100.0% of portfolios in the 6-10 property range and 86.7% in the two-property tier.

Unlike in larger urban markets, there is no crossover point where companies become the majority owners. Individual ownership remains dominant throughout the entire local investor landscape.

Due to the complete lack of Q4 2025 transactions, it is impossible to compare acquisition prices between individual and company buyers.

Investor ownership is highly concentrated in a few key zip codes within Rush County. The area of 67548 contains the highest number of investor-owned properties at 331, where landlords own 53.7% of all SFRs.

The highest rates of investor penetration are found in smaller zip codes. In 67513, investors own 72.1% of the housing stock, and in 67565, they own 67.1% (114 properties).

Other areas of significant investor presence include 67520, with 75 investor-owned properties (58.6% rate), and 67556, with 67 properties (51.5% rate).

The data reveals a consistent pattern of high investor saturation across the county, with ownership rates commonly exceeding 50% in populated zip codes.

This deep geographic penetration underscores the fundamental role landlords play in the local housing ecosystem of Rush County.

The historical transaction data for Rush County indicates a complete lack of market activity, with zero buy and zero sell transactions recorded for landlords.

This absence of trading makes it impossible to determine if landlords are net buyers or sellers, as the buy/sell ratio is undefined.

Consequently, there is no data on inter-landlord transactions, meaning the percentage of properties bought from or sold to other landlords is 0%.

Analysis of pricing dynamics, such as the margin between average buy and sell prices, cannot be performed due to the zero transaction volume.

Institutional investors (1000+ tier) mirror the overall market trend, showing no buying or selling activity, reflecting their zero-property presence in the county.

In Q4 2025, the transaction market in Rush County was entirely dormant, with zero total SFR transactions recorded. As a result, landlords' share of these transactions was 0.0%.

Transaction volume was zero across all investor tiers, from single-property owners to the largest portfolio holders.

Due to the lack of acquisitions, there is no Q4 data on average purchase prices by tier, preventing any analysis of whether smaller or larger investors pay more.

Similarly, inter-landlord trading activity was non-existent. The number of properties bought from other landlords was zero for all tiers.

This complete standstill in Q4 transactions provides a stark picture of a market with extremely low liquidity and no recent investor capital flow.