Wilson (KS) Investor Pulse Report (2026-Q1)

In Wilson County, KS, investors hold a substantial footprint, owning 873 single-family residential properties, which constitutes 30.9% of the county's total 2,822 SFRs.

The ownership structure is heavily skewed towards small-scale, individual investors. Individuals own 713 properties, accounting for 81.7% of the investor portfolio, while companies own the remaining 164 properties (18.8%).

This individual dominance is also reflected in the entity count, where 770 of the 841 distinct landlords are individuals. This demonstrates a market characterized by local, non-corporate ownership rather than large-scale real estate investing firms.

A defining characteristic of this market is the low reliance on financing. A staggering 769 properties (88.1% of the portfolio) are owned with cash, compared to just 104 that are financed, signaling financial stability and a potentially lower-risk approach among local landlords.

The portfolio is clearly rental-focused, with 842 properties designated as rented, confirming the primary business model for these owners.

Analysis of acquisition pricing and trends is not possible for Wilson County, as there were no recorded landlord or traditional homeowner purchases in the most recent quarters.

Consequently, it is not possible to calculate a price gap or discount that landlords may have received compared to traditional homeowners.

The lack of recent transactions also means there is no data to assess price appreciation or changes in buying behavior between the current period and prior years.

The only available historical data point shows an average acquisition price of $46,597 during the 2020-2023 period, but this figure cannot be used to determine current market values or trends.

Without active purchasing, key market indicators related to pricing strategy and valuation remain undetermined for this geography.

The investor market in Wilson County experienced a complete standstill in Q4 2025, with landlords making zero SFR purchases out of a total of zero market sales.

This lack of activity means investors captured 0.0% of the market, a significant indicator of a frozen or illiquid housing market for this period.

The purchasing inactivity was consistent across all investor sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who dominate the market's holdings, acquired no new properties.

Similarly, institutional investors recorded zero purchases, maintaining the status quo of their minimal presence in the county.

No new landlords entered the market via a first-time purchase, indicating a lack of new capital or interest in starting rental portfolios in the current climate.

The investor landscape in Wilson County is unequivocally dominated by small-scale operators. Mom-and-pop landlords (owning 1-10 properties) control 90.2% of all investor-owned SFRs.

The market's granular nature is highlighted by single-property landlords (Tier 01), who own 515 properties, representing 56.3% of the entire investor portfolio. This underscores the importance of first-time and small-scale investors to the local rental supply.

Mid-size landlords (11-1,000 properties) hold a combined 9.7% of the properties, indicating a steep drop-off in portfolio size after the 10-property mark.

Institutional investors with portfolios exceeding 1,000 properties have virtually no presence, owning just one property which accounts for a mere 0.1% of the market share.

Due to the lack of recent transactions, no pricing analysis by tier is possible to determine if larger investors pay different prices than smaller ones.

In Wilson County, individual investors maintain majority ownership across all defined portfolio tiers, reinforcing their market-wide dominance.

There is no crossover point where companies become the majority owner. Even among landlords with 11-20 properties, individuals own 23 homes (63.9%) compared to 13 for companies (36.1%).

Company ownership, while always in the minority, does show a slight increase with portfolio size. Companies own just 9.2% of single-property portfolios but increase their share to 21.2% in the 6-10 property tier.

This pattern suggests that as local investors grow their portfolios, a minority may choose to incorporate for liability or operational purposes, but the prevailing structure remains individual ownership.

The data clearly shows that both small and relatively larger local portfolios are primarily held by individual landlords, not corporate entities.

Investor activity in Wilson County is not evenly distributed but is instead highly concentrated in specific geographic pockets. The zip codes 66736 (368 properties) and 66757 (333 properties) together account for 701 of the 873 investor-owned homes, or 80.3% of the total.

Some areas exhibit extremely high investor penetration rates. The 67335 zip code leads with 50.0% of its homes owned by investors, followed by 66710 at 40.7%.

These high-density investor zones suggest targeted acquisition strategies in very specific neighborhoods or towns within the county.

The top regions by sheer count of investor properties are 66736 (368 properties) and 66757 (333 properties), both with an identical ownership rate of 30.6%.

This geographic concentration is a key feature of the market, indicating that local knowledge and focus drive investment decisions more than a broad, county-wide approach.

A full analysis of historical transaction dynamics for Wilson County investors cannot be conducted due to the absence of available data.

It is not possible to determine if landlords have been net buyers or sellers over time, as buy and sell transaction counts are not provided.

Key metrics on market liquidity, such as the percentage of transactions that occur between landlords, are also unavailable.

Furthermore, without comparative buy and sell price data, it is impossible to analyze potential profit margins or pricing strategies in historical transactions.

This data gap means long-term investor sentiment and market direction, typically revealed through transaction trends, remain unknown for this area.

In Q1, the real estate transaction market for investors in Wilson County was completely dormant, with zero transactions recorded.

This resulted in a 0.0% market share for landlords in all transactional activity for the quarter, reflecting a total pause in both acquisitions and dispositions.

The lack of activity was universal across all investor sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords, who constitute the vast majority of owners, were not involved in any purchases or sales.

Likewise, the market's few larger and institutional-scale owners also recorded zero transactions during this period.

Consequently, there is no data on inter-landlord trading or purchase prices by tier for Q1, reinforcing the picture of a deeply quiet and illiquid market.