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

Investors hold a substantial 39.2% share of the Single-Family Residential market in Russell County, owning 1,108 of the 2,826 total SFR properties.

Individual investors are the definitive market force, owning 898 properties, which accounts for 81.0% of the investor-held portfolio. Company investors hold the remaining 211 properties, or 19.0%.

The market is defined by outright ownership, as 100% of the 1,108 investor-owned properties are held in cash, with zero properties recorded as financed. This indicates a low-leverage environment where investors are not exposed to mortgage rate fluctuations.

There are 1,122 distinct landlord entities in the county, with 1,038 being individuals and 84 being companies. This results in a ratio of more than 12 individual landlords for every one company landlord.

The vast majority of the investor portfolio is actively used for rentals. A total of 1,083 properties are classified as rented, representing 97.7% of all investor-owned homes and underscoring the rental-focused strategy of local landlords.

A complete lack of sales activity in Q4 2025 makes a direct price comparison between landlords and traditional homeowners impossible. There were zero recorded SFR purchases for either group during this period.

The absence of transaction data extends to previous periods, with zero landlord properties purchased between 2020-2023, signaling a prolonged state of low market velocity.

This data points to an illiquid market where properties are tightly held and transactions are rare. Investors appear to be in a long-term holding pattern rather than actively buying or selling.

Without transaction data, it is impossible to assess price appreciation or determine if landlords secure properties at a discount compared to the general market in Russell County.

The market stasis suggests that current owners are not motivated to sell and new buyers are not entering, creating a frozen landscape for real estate investment.

The investor purchase market in Russell County was dormant in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring zero properties. This reflects a broader market standstill, as the total number of SFR purchases was also zero.

Activity was nonexistent across all investor sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) made zero acquisitions, mirroring the lack of activity from larger investors.

Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) had no presence or purchasing activity in the county during Q4 2025, holding 0.0% of all landlord purchases.

Reflecting the frozen market, there were no new entrants into the landlord space. Zero single-property landlords (Tier 01) made a purchase, indicating no new investment from first-time buyers.

The complete lack of Q4 purchasing highlights a market defined by long-term holds rather than active trading or portfolio expansion.

The investor landscape in Russell County is overwhelmingly dominated by small-scale operators. Mom-and-pop landlords, who own between 1 and 10 properties, control a combined 88.1% of all investor-owned SFRs.

First-time or single-holding investors are the backbone of the market, with the '1 property' tier alone accounting for 738 properties, or 64.4% of the total investor portfolio.

Mid-size landlords (11-100 properties) represent a much smaller segment, collectively owning 136 properties, which constitutes just 11.9% of the investor market share.

There is a complete absence of large-scale institutional ownership. The '1,000+ properties' tier holds 0.0% of the market, reinforcing the local, small-investor character of the county.

The ownership structure is highly fragmented at the top. The largest investors fall into the '51-100 properties' tier, which controls only 5.1% of the market with 58 properties.

Unlike typical markets, individual investors in Russell County maintain majority ownership across all portfolio sizes, with no crossover point where companies become dominant.

Individual ownership is most concentrated at the entry level. In the '1 property' tier, individuals own 680 of the 738 properties, a staggering 92.0% share.

Even as portfolio sizes increase, individuals retain control. They own 87.8% of two-property portfolios and 77.5% of portfolios in the 3-5 property range.

Companies achieve their strongest position in the '21-50 property' tier, owning 24 properties for a 49.0% share, but they still do not reach a majority.

This pattern indicates that even the larger landlords in this county are more likely to be private individuals or families rather than formalized corporate entities, reinforcing the local, non-institutional nature of the market.

Investor activity is geographically focused, with the top five zip codes accounting for 1,018 of the 1,108 investor-owned properties, representing 91.9% of the entire portfolio.

The zip code 67665 is the epicenter of investor ownership by volume, containing 618 investor-owned SFRs, which is 55.8% of the county's total investor portfolio.

Certain areas exhibit exceptionally high investor saturation. Zip code 67490 is fully investor-owned at a 100.0% rate, followed by 67640 (80.9%) and 67634 (78.6%), indicating these areas are almost exclusively rental markets.

There is a distinction between the areas with the highest count and the highest percentage of ownership. For instance, 67665 has the most properties but a lower ownership rate (29.8%) compared to smaller zips like 67640 (80.9% rate).

This concentration suggests that investors target specific communities within the county, creating pockets of extremely high rental density.

A lack of available historical transaction data for Russell County prevents any analysis of long-term market dynamics. It is not possible to determine buy/sell ratios over time.

Without transaction history, the net position of landlords cannot be established. It remains unknown whether investors have been accumulating or divesting properties in recent years.

The volume of landlord-to-landlord transactions is also indeterminable. This obscures insight into the internal liquidity of the investor market and how often properties trade between existing owners.

Similarly, institutional investor transaction patterns cannot be assessed due to the data gap, though their current ownership level is zero.

This absence of data suggests a market with very infrequent turnover, where assets are held for the long term and sales are not a significant feature of the investment landscape.

The Q4 2025 transaction market in Russell County was completely inactive, with zero sales recorded. As a result, landlords' share of transactions was 0.0%.

This inactivity was uniform across all investor sizes. The smallest mom-and-pop landlords (Tier 01-04) and the largest mid-size investors recorded zero transactions.

Due to the lack of sales, there is no data on average purchase prices by tier for Q4. It's impossible to compare the buying strategies or price points of different investor segments.

Inter-landlord trading was also nonexistent, with zero properties bought from other landlords. This indicates no portfolio shuffling or internal market activity during the quarter.

The data portrays a market in a state of stasis, with no capital flowing in or out of the investor SFR sector during the final quarter of 2025.