Lawrence (MS) Investor Pulse Report (2026-Q1)

In Lawrence County, investors hold 903 Single-Family Residential (SFR) properties, which constitutes 21.8% of the total 4,134 SFRs in the market. This reveals a significant investor presence in the local housing stock.

The ownership structure is overwhelmingly dominated by individual investors. They own 713 properties, accounting for 79.0% of the investor portfolio, while companies own the remaining 209 properties (23.1%).

A look at the landlord entities themselves reinforces this pattern, with 804 individual landlords compared to just 198 company landlords. This points to a market characterized by small-scale, personal real estate investing rather than large corporate operations.

Financing is exceptionally rare among investors in this market. A massive 883 properties are owned with cash, while only 20 are financed. This suggests investors in Lawrence County have high liquidity and low leverage.

The portfolio is heavily focused on generating rental income, with 882 of the 903 properties identified as rented. This high concentration underscores the primary strategy of investors in the area is to buy and hold for rental revenue.

A direct comparison between landlord and traditional homeowner acquisition prices for the current quarter is not possible in Lawrence County. The data indicates there were zero properties purchased by investors, making any analysis of a price gap or discount infeasible.

The lack of purchasing activity extends back through the entire year. No investor acquisitions were recorded in 2024-Q4 or for the full Year 2024, signaling a prolonged pause in investor buying.

The most recent pricing benchmark available is from the 2020-2023 period. During that timeframe, the average acquisition price for the properties investors did purchase was $60,186.

This absence of recent transactional data is a significant finding in itself, suggesting either a highly illiquid market, a lack of desirable inventory for investors, or a strategic retreat from purchasing in the current economic environment.

Without new purchases, it's impossible to gauge price appreciation trends or determine if local investors are paying more or less than they did during the pandemic-era boom.

The investor purchase market in Lawrence County was dormant in the last quarter of 2025. Landlords acquired zero properties, accounting for 0.0% of the total 0 SFR purchases in the market.

This halt in activity was universal across all investor sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who dominate the local market's ownership, made no new purchases.

Similarly, there was no activity from mid-size or institutional investors, reflecting a market-wide pause in acquisitions rather than a shift in behavior from a single segment.

The data shows no new landlords entering the market, as the single-property (Tier 01) category also recorded zero purchases.

This lack of purchasing activity is the most critical finding for the quarter, indicating a potential market freeze where investors are neither adding to nor churning their portfolios through new acquisitions.

The ownership structure in Lawrence County is extremely concentrated among small-scale investors. Landlords with 1-10 properties (Tiers 01-04) collectively own 99.1% of all investor-held SFRs.

The single-property landlord (Tier 01) is the most dominant force, holding 717 properties. This single tier accounts for 76.8% of all investor-owned housing, highlighting a market built on first-time or small-scale investment.

The next largest tiers are also small: two-property landlords own 8.5% of the portfolio (79 properties), and those with 3-5 properties own 10.0% (93 properties).

In stark contrast, there is zero institutional ownership in Lawrence County. The 1000+ property tier (Tier 09) holds 0.0% of the market, indicating this area is completely off the radar for large-scale corporate investors.

Because there was no recent purchasing activity, analysis of acquisition prices by tier is not possible. The market's ownership is defined by its hyper-local, small-investor base.

In Lawrence County, individual investors maintain majority ownership across every single portfolio size, a pattern that underscores their deep-rooted control of the local market. There is no tier where companies become the dominant owner type.

This trend is evident even as portfolios grow. In the two-property tier, individuals own 59 properties (74.7%) compared to 20 for companies (25.3%). The disparity is even greater in the 3-5 property tier, where individuals own 90 properties (96.8%).

Even at the smallest scale, single-property (Tier 01) ownership is skewed towards individuals, who own 555 properties (75.5%) versus 180 for companies.

The largest active tier, small-medium landlords with 11-20 properties, is composed entirely of individuals, who own 100% of the 8 properties in that bracket.

This data clearly shows that company ownership remains a small fraction of the market at all levels of investment, making Lawrence County a quintessential market for the individual, non-corporate landlord.

Geographic analysis reveals that investor ownership in Lawrence County is concentrated in specific zip codes. The 39654 zip code, which includes Monticello, leads by a significant margin with 402 investor-owned SFRs.

Following Monticello, other areas with notable investor property counts include 39663 (214 properties), 39140 (109 properties), and 39641 (102 properties). This highlights a few key sub-markets for rental housing.

When analyzing by ownership rate, a different picture emerges. The 39191 zip code has the highest investor penetration, with 42.1% of its housing stock owned by investors, indicating a very high density of rental properties.

The areas with high property counts also have high ownership rates, suggesting a strong correlation. The 39140 zip code has a 26.8% investor ownership rate, and 39663 has a 23.9% rate, both well above the county average of 21.8%.

This data points to distinct pockets within the county where property ownership is heavily skewed towards investors, likely shaping the local rental market dynamics in those specific communities.

A comprehensive analysis of historical transaction trends for Lawrence County is not possible due to the absence of available data. This includes transaction counts for both all landlords and the institutional tier.

As a result, a definitive conclusion on whether landlords have been net buyers or net sellers over time cannot be reached. The buy/sell ratio, a key indicator of market sentiment and direction, cannot be calculated.

The data does not allow for an analysis of market liquidity or churn. Key metrics, such as the percentage of transactions that occur between landlords, are unavailable.

Similarly, it is not possible to compare average buy prices to average sell prices across different timeframes. This prevents any insight into potential profit margins or price appreciation realized by selling investors.

The lack of this data means that while we can see a snapshot of current ownership, the historical trends that shaped this landscape remain obscured.

The final quarter of 2025 was marked by a complete absence of transaction activity from real estate investors in Lawrence County. Landlords were involved in zero transactions, representing a 0.0% share of the market.

This inactivity was consistent across all portfolio sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04), who own nearly the entire investor housing stock, did not transact any properties.

Likewise, there were no transactions from mid-size or institutional investors, reinforcing the observation of a market-wide pause in activity.

Given the lack of purchases, analysis of acquisition pricing strategies between tiers is not possible. There is no data to compare what different-sized investors might be willing to pay in the current market.

The market also saw no inter-landlord trading. The percentage of properties bought from other landlords was 0%, indicating a lack of portfolio churning among existing investors during this period.