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

In Perry County, investors hold 1,038 Single-Family Residential (SFR) properties, making up 11.2% of the total 9,234 SFRs in the market. This reflects a significant, yet not dominant, investor presence.

Ownership is overwhelmingly skewed towards individuals, who own 799 properties (77.0%) compared to the 270 properties (26.0%) owned by companies. This pattern extends to the entity level, where 971 of the 1,116 landlords (87.0%) are individuals.

The financial structure of these holdings reveals a preference for low leverage. Investors own 777 properties with cash, nearly three times the 261 properties that are financed. This suggests a fiscally conservative approach to portfolio building in the region.

The portfolio's primary function is clear: 982 of the 1,038 properties (94.6%) are classified as rented. This high concentration underscores that the vast majority of investor-owned properties directly contribute to the local rental housing supply.

The data points to a market characterized by small, independent operators rather than large corporate entities, a key insight for understanding local housing dynamics and the nature of real estate investing in Perry County.

Investors in Perry County demonstrated a significant pricing advantage in the first quarter, acquiring properties for an average of $160,541. This was 19.4% less than the $199,148 paid by traditional homeowners, resulting in an average discount of $38,607 per transaction.

However, this discount has been far from consistent. Historical data reveals extreme volatility, with the landlord discount reaching a staggering 59.6% ($189,197) in 2025-Q1 before flipping to a 14.2% premium in 2025-Q2, where landlords paid $36,615 more than homeowners.

This price gap volatility suggests an inefficient market with low transaction volumes, where a few deals can heavily skew quarterly averages. The substantial discounts in most quarters indicate that investors are adept at finding off-market deals or targeting undervalued assets.

Acquisition prices for investors have fluctuated significantly over the past two years. The average price in 2024 was $178,627, rising to $232,192 in 2025 before settling at $160,541 in the most recent quarter.

The ability to consistently acquire properties below the typical homeowner price point is a core strategic advantage for investors in this market, enabling better potential for cash flow and appreciation.

Investor activity accounted for a significant portion of the Perry County housing market in Q1, with landlords acquiring 16 of the 65 total SFRs sold, a market share of 24.6%.

The acquisition landscape is dominated by small-scale investors. Mom-and-pop landlords (owning 1-10 properties) drove 93.8% of all investor purchases, acquiring 15 of the 16 properties.

A notable trend is the influx of new market participants. Twelve new landlord entities entered the market in Q1, each purchasing their first property. These new entrants alone accounted for 11 of the 16 total investor acquisitions, highlighting a growing base of small landlords.

In stark contrast, institutional investors (1,000+ properties) had a minimal impact, purchasing only a single property, which represents just 6.2% of the investor-led activity for the quarter.

This data confirms that the momentum in the local investment market is driven by the smallest players, particularly first-time landlords, rather than large, established firms.

The investor landscape in Perry County is overwhelmingly controlled by small, local landlords. Mom-and-pop investors (owning 1-10 properties) hold a combined 90.1% of all investor-owned SFRs, cementing their role as the backbone of the rental market.

Single-property landlords represent the largest segment by a wide margin, with their 736 properties accounting for 69.2% of the entire investor-owned housing stock. This highlights the decentralized nature of rental ownership in the county.

Conversely, the presence of institutional investors (1,000+ properties) is negligible. This tier owns just 4 properties, representing only 0.4% of the investor market, challenging any narrative of a corporate takeover of local housing.

A sharp divergence in acquisition strategy is evident in Q1 transaction prices. Single-property landlords paid an average of $220,970, while the lone institutional acquisition was at $66,667, a 69.8% discount. This suggests institutions target deeply distressed assets, while new landlords buy more market-rate properties.

The data from these Investor Pulse reports consistently shows that market power resides with small operators, whose collective ownership dwarfs that of mid-size and institutional players combined.

Individual investors form the foundation of the market, dominating the smaller portfolio tiers. They own 89.3% of single-property portfolios and 72.7% of two-property portfolios.

A distinct shift occurs as portfolios grow. The crossover point where companies become the majority owners is in the 6-10 property tier, where they control 70.8% of the properties, compared to just 29.2% for individuals.

This trend toward corporate ownership accelerates significantly in the next tier. For landlords holding 11-20 properties, companies own a commanding 91.2% of the assets.

This pattern indicates a clear path of professionalization. While individuals initiate most investment activity, scaling a portfolio beyond five properties in Perry County is almost exclusively done under a corporate structure.

This structural shift from individual to corporate ownership as portfolios scale is a key feature of the local market's composition, signaling different strategies for management, financing, and liability.

Investor ownership in Perry County is highly concentrated geographically. The top two zip codes, 43076 (210 properties) and 43764 (207 properties), together contain 417 properties, representing 40.2% of all investor-owned SFRs in the county.

The zip code with the highest number of investor properties is 43076, with 210 homes, which translates to a 13.7% investor ownership rate.

However, the highest rate of investor penetration is found elsewhere. Zip code 43766 has an investor ownership rate of 17.3%, making it the most saturated market, even though its total number of investor properties is lower than the leaders.

This distinction between high-volume areas and high-penetration areas is crucial. An area like 43076 represents the largest hub of investor activity, while an area like 43766 indicates a market where investors have the largest relative footprint.

The top five zip codes by property count (43076, 43764, 43731, 43783, and 43076 again, likely a data error) demonstrate a clear focus on specific communities for investment within the county.

Landlords in Perry County are in a strong accumulation phase, acting as decisive net buyers. In Q1 2026, they purchased 17 properties while selling only one, creating an overwhelming 17-to-1 buy-to-sell ratio.

This trend of portfolio growth is not new. In 2025, landlords bought 94 properties and sold 23 (a 4.1x ratio), and in 2024 they bought 74 while selling 17 (a 4.35x ratio), signaling sustained market confidence.

Transactional data for Q1 reveals that 100% of investor acquisitions came from the open market rather than from other landlords. This indicates that investors are adding to the overall rental supply by converting owner-occupied housing, not just trading assets among themselves.

The behavior of institutional investors offers a stark contrast. In 2025, they were perfectly neutral, with 3 buys and 3 sells. This lack of net acquisition activity shows they are not a driving force of growth in the local market.

The market's liquidity is primarily fueled by landlords acquiring properties from traditional homeowners, a dynamic that directly impacts the balance of owner-occupied versus rental housing in the county.

In the first quarter, landlords participated in 17 of the 81 total SFR transactions in Perry County, capturing 21.0% of all market activity. This solidifies their position as a significant and active buyer segment.

Transaction volume was heavily concentrated in the smallest tiers. Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) accounted for 16 of the 17 investor transactions, with institutional investors making only a single purchase.

Q1 data reveals a dramatic difference in buying strategy based on investor size. Single-property landlords, often new to the market, paid an average price of $220,970. In contrast, the one institutional purchase was for $66,667, a 69.8% lower price point that suggests a focus on distressed or wholesale opportunities.

The data on transaction origins is definitive: 0% of investor purchases in Q1 came from other landlords. This shows a complete reliance on acquiring properties from the general homeowner market to expand portfolios.

The wide price spread between small and large investors indicates the existence of separate acquisition channels and a market where deep-value opportunities are captured by the most sophisticated buyers.