Union (IN) Investor Pulse Report (2026-Q1)

In Union County, investors hold a significant 22.6% share of the Single-Family Residential market, with a total of 454 properties under their control out of 2,005 total SFRs.

The investor landscape is overwhelmingly dominated by individuals, who own 393 properties, or 86.6% of the total investor portfolio. Company ownership is minimal, accounting for just 61 properties (13.4%). This is further reflected in the entity count, where 503 individual landlords vastly outnumber the 50 company landlords.

A key feature of this market is the low reliance on leverage. A remarkable 442 investor-owned properties are owned outright with cash, while only 12 are financed, signaling a financially conservative approach by local investors.

The portfolio is almost exclusively focused on generating rental income. Of the 454 properties, 448 are classified as non-owner-occupied, underscoring the business-oriented nature of these holdings.

The combination of high individual ownership and low leverage suggests that the Union County market is driven by small-scale, financially stable mom-and-pop operators rather than large, debt-fueled corporate entities. These investors form the backbone of the local rental market.

Pricing for landlord acquisitions in Union County demonstrates significant volatility, a characteristic of a thinly traded market. In Q1 2025, landlords paid an average of $179,150, which was an 11.5% premium over the traditional homeowner price of $160,641.

This trend reversed dramatically in the following quarter. In Q2 2025, landlords acquired properties at an average price of $181,041, representing a deep 27.9% discount compared to the homeowner average of $251,000. This swing amounts to a $69,959 price advantage per property.

The stark contrast between paying a premium one quarter and securing a major discount the next suggests that there is no consistent pricing strategy. Instead, the small number of transactions means that the specific type and condition of a single property can heavily influence the quarterly average.

Further underscoring the market's low velocity, no landlord purchases were recorded in Q3 2025 or more recently, making it impossible to establish a stable pricing trend.

This price behavior indicates that investors in Union County are likely opportunistic buyers, with purchase prices fluctuating based on specific deals rather than broad market movements.

The most recent quarter (Q4 2025) saw a complete freeze in investor acquisition activity in Union County, with landlords purchasing zero SFR properties. This marks a significant pause in a market that had previously seen consistent buying.

This halt was not isolated to investors; the data indicates that the total number of SFR purchases in the county was also zero for the quarter. This suggests a market-wide standstill rather than a specific retreat by investors.

As a result of the inactivity, the landlord market share for the quarter was 0.0%. No new landlords entered the market, and existing investors did not expand their portfolios through new purchases.

This lack of activity contrasts with historical data showing a pattern of steady accumulation by landlords, pointing to a potential shift in market conditions, a lack of desirable inventory, or a pricing standoff between buyers and sellers.

The absence of new purchases across all investor tiers indicates that the factors causing this pause are affecting everyone from first-time landlords to more established operators.

The investor ownership structure in Union County is defined by the near-total dominance of small-scale operators. Mom-and-pop landlords, defined as those owning 1-10 properties, control a massive 98.9% of all investor-owned SFRs.

The foundation of this market is the single-property landlord. This tier alone accounts for 365 properties, representing 79.0% of the entire investor-held housing stock. This highlights the importance of first-time and small-scale investors to the local rental supply.

In stark contrast to national headlines, large-scale institutional investors (1,000+ properties) have absolutely no footprint in Union County, holding 0.0% of the market. The entire portfolio is held by investors with fewer than 1,000 properties.

Ownership concentration dissipates quickly in larger tiers. Investors with 11-100 properties collectively own just 0.6% of the portfolio, reinforcing the market's small-investor character.

This distribution paints a clear picture of Union County as a quintessential mom-and-pop market, driven by local real estate investing and completely separate from the activities of large institutional funds.

While individuals dominate the overall investor landscape in Union County, a distinct pattern emerges when analyzing ownership by portfolio size. Individuals overwhelmingly own smaller portfolios, accounting for 90.4% of single-property assets and 87.8% of two-property portfolios.

The balance of power shifts decisively as portfolios grow. In the 3-5 property tier, individuals still hold a majority at 77.1%, but company ownership begins to increase to 22.9%.

A clear crossover point occurs in the 6-10 property tier. Here, companies take control, owning 7 of the 8 properties, which constitutes a commanding 87.5% majority. This suggests that scaling beyond five properties often coincides with incorporation for legal or financial reasons.

This trend highlights different strategies and operational structures. The path for many appears to begin with individual ownership, with a transition to a corporate structure as the portfolio and its complexities expand.

The data clearly illustrates two distinct investor paths: the individual landlord who typically owns a few properties, and the more professionalized operator who uses a company structure to manage a larger, albeit still small-scale, portfolio.

Investor activity in Union County is not evenly distributed but is instead highly concentrated in specific zip codes. The zip codes 47331 and 47003 stand out with investor ownership rates of 51.7% and 49.8% respectively, indicating that investors own roughly half of all SFR properties in these areas.

These high-saturation areas have penetration rates more than double the county-wide average of 22.6%, revealing a targeted investment strategy focused on particular submarkets.

It is important to distinguish between the highest rate of ownership and the highest volume. While 47331 has the highest percentage, the zip code 47353 is the volume leader, containing 254 investor-owned properties, despite a lower ownership rate of 16.4%.

This geographic clustering suggests that investors are drawn to specific neighborhoods, likely due to factors like affordability, rental demand, or school districts that are not uniform across the county.

The presence of such high-density investor pockets can significantly shape local housing dynamics, affecting everything from property values to the availability of homes for traditional owner-occupiers.

Historically, landlords in Union County have been in a strong accumulation phase, consistently buying more properties than they sell. This trend was particularly pronounced in Q2 2025, where investors purchased 18 properties and sold only one, resulting in a net gain of 17 properties.

This behavior is not a short-term anomaly. Across all of 2025, landlords achieved a net gain of 37 properties (40 buys vs. 3 sells), and in 2024, they added a net of 23 properties (27 buys vs. 4 sells).

This aggressive net buying indicates strong confidence in the local rental market and a long-term strategy of portfolio growth among the county's investor base.

The activity of large institutional investors (1000+ tier) is a non-factor in this market. Their only recorded activity in 2024 was perfectly balanced, with one purchase and one sale, having no net impact on the housing stock.

While landlords have been consistent net buyers, the complete halt in transactions in the most recent quarter signals a sharp and sudden break from this established pattern of growth.

In the most recent quarter (Q4 2025), transaction activity among Union County real estate investors came to a complete stop, with a total of zero properties bought or sold. This gave landlords a 0.0% share of a non-existent transaction market.

This inactivity was universal across all investor sizes. Both small mom-and-pop landlords and the few larger entities in the county recorded no transactions, indicating the market pause was systemic.

Due to the lack of transactions, it is not possible to analyze recent pricing strategies by tier or to determine the level of inter-landlord trading. The market for investor properties was effectively closed.

This sudden halt is especially noteworthy because it follows several years of consistent net buying by the same investor base, as detailed in the historical transaction data. The abrupt change suggests a significant shift in market dynamics.

A complete absence of transactions often points to a fundamental disagreement on value between potential buyers and sellers, a severe lack of available inventory, or widespread uncertainty about the market's future direction.