Harrison (OH) Investor Pulse Report (2026-Q1)

In Harrison County, investors hold a significant 25.3% of the single-family residential market, totaling 1,155 properties. This demonstrates a substantial investor presence within the local housing ecosystem.

Ownership is heavily skewed towards individuals over corporations. Individual investors own 993 properties, or 86.0% of the investor-owned market, compared to just 166 properties (14.4%) owned by companies. This highlights a market driven by small, local operators rather than large corporate entities.

The investor base itself reflects this individual dominance, with 1,341 individual landlords making up the vast majority of the 1,475 total investors in the county. This structure suggests a fragmented market with a low average portfolio size per owner.

Cash is the preferred method of acquisition for Harrison County investors. A striking 965 properties in the portfolio are held free of financing, compared to only 190 that are financed, signaling that many investors have significant capital and are not reliant on leverage.

The portfolio is almost exclusively dedicated to rentals. Of the 1,155 investor-owned homes, 1,135 are rented, confirming that the primary strategy for real estate investing in this market is long-term rental income rather than short-term flips or other uses.

Investors in Harrison County consistently purchase properties at a significant discount compared to traditional homeowners. In Q1 2026, landlords paid an average of $137,965, which is 21.8% less than the $176,326 average paid by homeowners, creating an immediate equity advantage of $38,361 per acquisition.

While the discount remains substantial, it has narrowed considerably over the past year. The 21.8% price gap in Q1 2026 is much smaller than the massive 58.3% discount ($109,336) observed in Q2 2025, suggesting a more competitive purchasing environment is emerging.

The trend of shrinking discounts continued from late 2025, where the gap was 50.6% in Q1 and 24.5% in Q3. This progressive narrowing indicates that the price floor for investment properties may be rising faster than the general market.

Acquisition prices for landlords have shown volatility but are trending upwards. The average price of $137,965 in Q1 2026 is a significant step up from the 2025 yearly average of $97,508, reflecting broader market appreciation.

Comparing recent prices to the pandemic era (2020-2023 average of $104,159) further highlights recent price growth. The Q1 2026 average price is 32.5% higher than the average during that four-year boom period, signaling strong recent market performance.

Investor activity accounted for a significant portion of the Harrison County real estate market in Q4 2025, with landlords purchasing 8 of the 29 total SFRs sold, a market share of 27.6%.

The quarter's purchasing activity was exclusively driven by small-scale investors. Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) acquired all 8 of the properties bought by investors, reinforcing their role as the primary source of demand in the rental market.

New investors are actively entering the market. Seven new single-property landlord entities were created in Q4, acquiring 5 homes and representing 55.6% of all investor purchases for the period. This signals a healthy influx of first-time investors.

The mid-size and institutional tiers were completely absent from the market. No purchases were made by investors with portfolios larger than 50 properties, and institutional-grade investors (1,000+ properties) made no acquisitions at all.

Activity was concentrated at the smallest end of the spectrum, with landlords in the 1-5 property range accounting for 7 of the 8 total purchases. This highlights a hyper-localized and fragmented acquisition landscape.

The investor ownership landscape in Harrison County is overwhelmingly dominated by small-scale landlords. Investors with portfolios of 1-10 properties (Tiers 01-04) own 99.2% of all investor-held SFRs, a figure that defines the local market structure.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) form the bedrock of the rental market, owning 962 properties, which represents 81.4% of the entire investor-owned housing stock. This immense concentration in the smallest tier underscores the market's reliance on first-time and small-scale investors.

In stark contrast, institutional investors (Tier 09) have a nearly non-existent footprint, controlling just 2 properties, or 0.2% of the market. This data refutes any narrative of large-scale corporate consolidation in Harrison County's rental market.

The entire middle market is also exceptionally thin. All tiers from 11 to 1,000 properties combined own just 8 properties, or less than 1% of the total investor portfolio. This illustrates a clear divide between a massive base of small landlords and a handful of slightly larger operators.

This distribution reveals a highly fragmented market where the vast majority of rental housing is provided by local, non-institutional owners. The market dynamics, from pricing to rental rates, are consequently shaped by the decisions of thousands of individual operators rather than a few large firms.

While individual investors dominate Harrison County's overall ownership with 86.0% of properties, a clear pattern emerges as portfolios scale. Companies transition from a minority to a majority ownership stake once an investor's portfolio reaches the 6-10 property tier.

The crossover point occurs decisively in the 'Small landlord (6-10)' tier, where companies own 24 properties (72.7%) compared to just 9 owned by individuals (27.3%). This suggests that investors formalize their operations under a corporate entity as their holdings and complexity grow.

In the smaller tiers, individual ownership is supreme. For single-property landlords, individuals own 872 homes (90.4%), and for two-property landlords, they own 74 homes (90.2%). This highlights that entry into the rental market is almost exclusively an individual pursuit.

The 'Small landlord (3-5)' tier serves as a transitional zone, where individuals still hold a majority at 65.3%, but company ownership rises to a significant 34.7%, foreshadowing the shift that occurs in the next tier up.

This tiered analysis of ownership type reveals a distinct lifecycle for real estate investors in the county: they typically start as individuals and incorporate into companies as their portfolios expand beyond five properties.

Investor ownership in Harrison County is not evenly distributed, but rather concentrated in specific geographic pockets. The zip code 43907 is the epicenter of activity by volume, with 322 investor-owned properties, though this represents a more moderate ownership rate of 19.7%.

Some zip codes exhibit remarkably high investor penetration rates. For instance, 43984 reports a 100% investor ownership rate, and 44693 shows a 47.2% rate, indicating these are prime targets for investment capital and may have a high density of rental housing.

The zip code 43988 is a significant hub for both volume and density, containing 256 investor-owned homes, which translates to a high 35.5% ownership rate. This combination makes it a key submarket for rental activity in the county.

Other notable areas of concentration include 43986, with 133 properties (28.2% rate), and 43976, with 100 properties (21.2% rate). These top five zip codes by count collectively house a large portion of the county's rental stock.

The data reveals a clear distinction between areas with the highest raw count of investor properties and those with the highest percentage. This suggests investors employ different strategies, with some targeting larger markets for volume and others focusing on smaller communities to achieve higher market saturation.

Landlords in Harrison County have been consistently and aggressively expanding their portfolios. In 2025, they demonstrated a strong net-buyer position, purchasing 72 properties while only selling 12, a buy-to-sell ratio of 6-to-1.

The accumulation of properties has continued into the new year. In Q1 2026, investors bought 11 single-family homes and sold only 4, resulting in a net gain of 7 properties and signaling continued confidence in the local rental market.

This pattern of accumulation is not a recent phenomenon. In 2024, the trend was similar, with 57 acquisitions against just 10 dispositions, a ratio of 5.7-to-1. The consistent, high ratio of buys to sells over multiple years points to a long-term strategic accumulation of rental assets in the county.

The data on institutional (1,000+ unit) transactions is unavailable, but the overall market trend is clearly one of growth and portfolio expansion driven by the broader investor community.

This sustained net-buyer behavior indicates strong fundamentals in the Harrison County rental market, with investors seeing more opportunity in holding and acquiring assets than in divesting them.

In the first quarter of 2026, landlords played a major role in the housing market, participating in 25.0% of all transactions. They acquired 11 of the 44 total SFR properties sold during this period.

A revealing pattern in Q1 was the source of inventory. None of the 11 landlord purchases were from other landlords (0% inter-landlord trading). This indicates that investors are sourcing their properties directly from the homeowner market or other channels like new construction, rather than trading assets among themselves.

Pricing strategies appear to vary by investor size. New entrants and single-property landlords paid the highest average price at $150,921. This may suggest they are less experienced in negotiating discounts or are targeting more move-in-ready properties compared to more established investors.

In contrast, small landlords in the 3-5 property tier paid a lower average of $127,500, potentially reflecting a strategy of acquiring properties that require improvements at a lower initial cost. The two-property tier investor paid just $68,200 for their acquisition.

All transactional activity was concentrated in the mom-and-pop tiers (1-10 properties), with 10 of the 11 transactions coming from this group. Institutional investors recorded zero transactions, reinforcing their lack of participation in the county's market.