Burnet (TX) Investor Pulse Report (2026-Q1)

Real Estate comprehensive investment analysis of investor activity in the Burnet (TX) single-family residential housing market. Discover ownership trends, transaction patterns, and market insights.

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Burnet (TX)
12,458
Total Investors in Burnet (TX)
2,827
Investor Owned SFR in Burnet (TX)
2,316(18.6%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
2,396
SFR Owned
1,816
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
431
SFR Owned
541
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 2,316 represents distinct properties - if 2+ landlords co-own the same property, it's counted only once. This provides the most accurate representation of investor-owned SFR properties.

Why totals don't sum: When broken down by Individual vs Corporate ownership (or by tier), properties with co-ownership across categories are counted once per category. For example, if a property is co-owned by an individual AND a corporate landlord, it appears in both counts. This is why Individual + Corporate totals may exceed the distinct total by 2-4%, and percentages may sum to 100-104%.

Market Visualization

Chart Section2 Coverage
Chart Section3 Ownership Donut
Chart Section4 Distribution

Key Market Insights

Mom-and-Pop Landlords Dominate Burnet County with 96.8% Ownership as Institutional Players Retreat
Investors own 2,316 SFR properties in Burnet County, representing 18.6% of the market. Individual, small-portfolio landlords control an overwhelming 96.8% of this inventory, while institutional ownership is nearly nonexistent. In Q1 2026, landlords were aggressive net buyers (61 buys vs. 16 sells), even as the single institutional entity in the market was a net seller.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 2,316 SFR properties in Burnet County, with individual landlords holding 78.4%.
The majority of investor-owned properties (1,552) are held free and clear as cash assets, compared to 764 that are financed. An overwhelming 98.4% of the landlord portfolio consists of non-owner-occupied, rented properties (2,278 of 2,316). Individual landlords (2,396) outnumber company landlords (431) by more than 5-to-1.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
In Q1 2026, landlords paid a 101.5% premium over homeowners, an anomaly in a volatile market.
The landlord-homeowner price gap fluctuates wildly, from a 12.4% landlord discount ($60,744) in Q3 2025 to a 10.0% premium in Q1 2025. This volatility points to a market where landlord purchase prices are not consistently lower. The Q1 2026 premium of $435,576 ($864,663 vs. $429,087) is a significant outlier.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords captured 29.5% of all SFR home purchases in the final quarter of 2025.
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) drove this activity, accounting for 69.2% of all investor purchases (36 properties). In contrast, institutional investors (1000+ properties) acquired only one property, representing just 1.9% of landlord buying activity. The market saw an influx of 39 new single-property landlord entities.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords overwhelmingly control Burnet County's rental market, owning 96.8% of all investor-held SFRs.
Single-property landlords alone account for 75.0% of all investor-owned homes (1,787 properties). Institutional investors (1000+ tier) have a negligible presence, with ownership of only one property, amounting to less than 0.1% of the market.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Companies become the majority property owners once a portfolio grows beyond 6 properties.
Individuals dominate smaller tiers, owning 84.9% of single-property portfolios and 68.3% of two-property portfolios. The shift is dramatic in the 11-20 property tier, where companies own 97.7% of the homes. This clear crossover point highlights different scaling strategies between owner types.
Geographic Distribution
Investor activity is most concentrated in zip code 78654, with 924 properties owned by landlords.
While 78654 has the highest count, zip code 76549 has the highest investor penetration rate at 40.0%. The top three zip codes by count (78654, 78611, 78657) collectively hold 1,853 properties, representing 80.0% of all investor-owned SFRs in the county.
Historical Transactions
Landlords are aggressive net buyers, acquiring 3.8 properties for every 1 they sold in Q1 2026.
This trend is driven by smaller investors, as the institutional tier was a net seller in Q1 2026, selling two properties while buying only one. This buying trend has been consistent, with landlords purchasing 245 properties and selling only 71 throughout 2025.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlord-involved transactions accounted for 25.5% of all SFR sales in Q1 2026.
A significant pricing advantage exists for larger players, as the institutional investor paid $363,955 for a property, 23.0% less than the $472,866 average paid by new single-property landlords. Larger investors also source more deals from other landlords, with the institutional buyer's purchase coming from another investor (100% rate).

Want deeper insights tailored to your investment strategy?

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Current Holdings Portfolio

Analysis of landlord property holdings by type, financing method, and owner category

Chart Section5 Holdings
Key Insight
Investors own 2,316 SFR properties in Burnet County, with individual landlords holding 78.4%.
Detailed Findings

In Burnet County, the investor-owned single-family residential (SFR) portfolio totals 2,316 properties, making up 18.6% of the total 12,458 SFRs in the market.

Individual investors are the definitive force in the local rental market, owning 1,816 properties, or 78.4% of the total investor portfolio. Company-owned properties account for the remaining 541 homes (23.4%), underscoring a market structure built on smaller, private ownership rather than large corporate holdings.

The financial health of the investor portfolio appears strong, with cash-owned properties (1,552) outnumbering financed ones (764) by more than a 2-to-1 margin. This suggests a low-leverage approach is prevalent among local landlords.

The portfolio is heavily focused on rental income, with 2,278 of the 2,316 properties classified as rented. This 98.4% rental rate indicates that nearly every property is actively part of the rental supply, not held for speculative or secondary home purposes.

The number of individual landlord entities (2,396) far surpasses company entities (431). This disparity, when compared to property counts, reveals that individuals typically manage smaller portfolios while companies, though fewer, tend to own more properties per entity.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
In Q1 2026, landlords paid a 101.5% premium over homeowners, an anomaly in a volatile market.
Detailed Findings

A striking pricing anomaly occurred in Q1 2026, where landlords acquired properties at an average price of $864,663, a staggering 101.5% premium over the traditional homeowner price of $429,087. This difference of $435,576 per property dramatically inverts the typical expectation of investors securing discounts.

The price relationship between landlords and homeowners in Burnet County is highly volatile and shows no consistent trend. In Q3 2025, landlords paid 12.4% less ($428,578 vs. $489,322), securing a $60,744 discount. However, this followed a period in Q1 2025 where they paid a 10.0% premium ($397,936 vs. $361,892).

This quarter-to-quarter fluctuation between significant discounts and premiums suggests that landlord acquisition strategies are highly varied. The data may be influenced by a small number of unique, high-value transactions rather than a broad market pattern.

Comparing recent years shows significant price appreciation. The average landlord acquisition price during the 2020-2023 period was $338,235. By 2024, it had risen to $485,911, demonstrating the rapid market heating experienced by all buyer types.

Chart Section6 Prices
Chart Section6 Prices Alt
Chart Section6 Trends
Chart Section6 Yoy Comparison

Current Quarter Purchase Summary

Analysis of Q1 2026 purchase activity by investor tier and type

Chart Section7 Purchases
Chart Section7 Tiers
Key Insight
Landlords captured 29.5% of all SFR home purchases in the final quarter of 2025.
Detailed Findings

Investors were a major force in the Burnet County market in Q4 2025, purchasing 51 of the 173 total SFRs sold, a market share of 29.5%. This high level of activity indicates strong investor demand for residential real estate in the area.

The backbone of this purchasing activity came from mom-and-pop landlords (owning 1-10 properties), who collectively bought 36 properties. This represents 69.2% of all landlord acquisitions for the quarter, highlighting the dominance of small-scale investors.

New entrants are a key feature of the market, with 39 distinct entities purchasing their very first investment property. These single-property landlords acquired 31 homes, making up 59.6% of all investor-bought properties in the quarter.

In stark contrast, institutional investors with portfolios of over 1,000 properties had a minimal impact, purchasing only a single property. This 1.9% share of activity reinforces that large-scale corporate buyers are not a significant factor in Burnet County's acquisition market.

Mid-size investors also showed concentrated activity, with just two entities in the 11-20 property tier acquiring 13 homes, accounting for 25.0% of all landlord purchases. This points to targeted growth from a small number of established local players.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords overwhelmingly control Burnet County's rental market, owning 96.8% of all investor-held SFRs.
Detailed Findings

The ownership structure of investor-held real estate in Burnet County is definitively controlled by small-scale landlords. Mom-and-pop investors, defined as those owning 1-10 properties (Tiers 01-04), hold a combined 96.8% of all investor-owned SFRs.

The most significant segment is the single-property landlord (Tier 01), who alone owns 1,787 properties. This represents 75.0% of the entire investor portfolio, indicating that the market is primarily composed of individuals entering real estate investing with a single rental home.

The data firmly refutes any narrative of an institutional takeover in this market. Investors in the 1000+ property tier (Tier 09) own just a single property, accounting for functionally 0.0% of the local investor-owned housing stock.

Mid-size landlords (11-1000 properties) also have a very limited footprint, collectively owning just 3.2% of the portfolio. This further reinforces the market's reliance on small, local investors rather than large, consolidated entities.

This distribution has remained stable, demonstrating a long-term pattern of decentralized ownership that makes up the core of the county's rental housing supply.

Chart Section8 Distribution
Chart Section8 Prices
Chart Section8 Prices Q4
Chart Section8 Yoy Comparison

Need custom portfolio analysis based on these tier insights?

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Ownership by Tier & Owner Type

Breakdown of individual vs corporate ownership across portfolio tiers

Chart Section9 Ownership
Chart Section9 Growth
Chart Section9 Growth Q4
Chart Section9 Yoy Comparison
Key Insight
Companies become the majority property owners once a portfolio grows beyond 6 properties.
Detailed Findings

A clear dividing line exists between individual and company ownership based on portfolio size in Burnet County. While individuals dominate the overall market, companies become the majority owners at the 6-10 property tier, holding 56.1% of properties in that segment.

For smaller portfolios, individual ownership is the standard. Individuals own 1,544 properties (84.9%) in the single-property tier and 136 properties (68.3%) in the two-property tier, showing that most new and small landlords are private citizens.

The transition to corporate ownership is stark as portfolios grow. In the 11-20 property tier, companies own 43 of the 44 properties, a commanding 97.7% share. This indicates that scaling beyond 10 properties almost always involves forming a legal entity.

Even in the largest local tier (101-1000 properties), companies maintain their dominance, owning 7 of the 8 properties (87.5%). This pattern suggests a professionalization threshold where the complexity of managing a larger portfolio necessitates a corporate structure.

This analysis of ownership by entity type reveals two distinct investor paths: the individual who typically manages a few properties, and the company structure adopted for scaling operations.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor activity is most concentrated in zip code 78654, with 924 properties owned by landlords.
Detailed Findings

Investor ownership in Burnet County shows significant geographic concentration. The zip code 78654 is the epicenter of activity by volume, containing 924 investor-owned properties, which represents an 18.1% ownership rate for that area.

However, the highest rate of investor ownership is found in zip code 76549, where landlords own 40.0% of the SFR housing stock. This highlights the difference between areas with high raw counts and those with the deepest market penetration.

The top five zip codes by property count (78654, 78611, 78657, 78669, 78605) together account for 2,216 properties. This means over 95% of all investor activity in the county is focused within these five areas.

The top region by ownership rate, 78657, also appears on the top count list with 231 properties and a 28.0% rate. This overlap indicates it is a key target for investors by both volume and saturation.

This data, often derived from public assessor data, reveals specific neighborhood-level pockets where rental properties are a dominant feature of the housing market, a crucial insight for local market analysis.

Chart Section10 Top Regions
Chart Section10 Top Pct

Historical Transactions

Buy/sell transaction trends over time for all landlords and institutional investors

Chart Section11 Buysell
Chart Section11 Buysell Price
Chart Section11 Yoy All Landlords
Chart Section11 Institutional
Chart Section11 Institutional Price
Chart Section11 Yoy Institutional
Key Insight
Landlords are aggressive net buyers, acquiring 3.8 properties for every 1 they sold in Q1 2026.
Detailed Findings

Landlords in Burnet County are in a clear accumulation phase, consistently buying far more properties than they sell. In Q1 2026, they demonstrated strong net buying activity, with 61 purchases versus only 16 sales, a buy-to-sell ratio of nearly 4-to-1.

This pattern of net acquisition has been consistent over time. Throughout 2025, landlords acquired 245 homes while divesting only 71, and in 2024, the ratio was even more pronounced with 231 buys against just 35 sells.

A critical divergence appears when segmenting by investor size. While the overall market is buying, the institutional tier (1000+ properties) is retreating. In Q1 2026, this tier was a net seller (1 buy, 2 sells) and maintained a neutral position throughout 2025 (4 buys, 4 sells).

This contrast reveals a two-tiered market dynamic: smaller, local landlords are expanding their portfolios and increasing their market share, while the largest player is either divesting or holding steady.

The transactional data indicates a healthy, liquid market where smaller investors are actively and confidently adding to their holdings.

Current Quarter Transactions

Q1 2026 transaction analysis by tier, price, and inter-landlord activity

Key Insight
Landlord-involved transactions accounted for 25.5% of all SFR sales in Q1 2026.
Detailed Findings

In Q1 2026, landlords were a party to 61 of the 239 total SFR transactions, representing a 25.5% share of all market activity. This demonstrates their significant and ongoing role in the county's real estate ecosystem.

A clear pricing hierarchy emerges based on investor size. New, single-property landlords paid the most, with an average purchase price of $472,866. In contrast, the institutional tier investor paid just $363,955, securing a 23.0% discount compared to the market's newest entrants.

Experienced investors are more likely to transact with each other. The institutional and medium-large (51-100) tiers both acquired 100% of their new properties from other landlords. Similarly, small landlords (3-5 properties) sourced 66.7% of their purchases from fellow investors.

Conversely, new landlords entering the market primarily buy from traditional homeowners. Only 12.8% of properties purchased by single-property investors came from other landlords, suggesting they are acquiring inventory from the general public, not a specialized network.

This Q1 data paints a picture of a sophisticated market where larger, more experienced investors leverage their scale and networks to achieve better pricing and source deals from within the investor community.

Chart Section12 Transactions
Chart Section12 Prices
Chart Section12 Prices Detail

Ready to leverage this data for your real estate investment decisions?

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Executive Summary

Mom-and-Pop investors solidify their control of Burnet County, owning 96.8% of rentals as institutions become net sellers.
Holdings
Landlords own 2,316 single-family properties in Burnet County, representing 18.6% of the total SFR market. Ownership is dominated by individuals, who hold 1,816 properties (78.4%), compared to 541 (23.4%) owned by companies.
Pricing
In Q1 2026 transactions, institutional investors demonstrated a pricing advantage, paying 23.0% less than new mom-and-pop buyers ($363,955 vs. $472,866). This contrasts with a market-wide Q1 2026 anomaly where the average landlord acquisition price was 101.5% higher than the average homeowner's.
Activity
Landlords accounted for 25.5% of all Q1 2026 transactions, with 39 new single-property investors entering the market. Mom-and-pop landlords were the most active, representing 45 of the 61 landlord transactions.
Market Share
Small, mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control an overwhelming 96.8% of the investor-owned housing stock. In contrast, institutional investors (1000+ properties) own just a single property, representing a near-zero market share.
Ownership Type
Individual investors overwhelmingly own smaller portfolios, but companies become the majority owners in portfolios of 6-10 properties. This trend accelerates in the 11-20 property tier, where companies own 97.7% of the homes.
Transactions
Landlords are strong net buyers with a 3.8-to-1 buy/sell ratio in Q1 2026 (61 buys vs. 16 sells). However, the institutional tier is moving in the opposite direction, acting as a net seller (1 buy vs. 2 sells).
Market Narrative

The real estate investment landscape in Burnet County, Texas is unequivocally shaped by small, independent operators. According to the latest market reports, investors own 2,316 single-family homes, or 18.6% of the county's total SFR inventory. The market structure heavily favors mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who control a staggering 96.8% of this portfolio. Individual investors hold 78.4% of the properties, leaving institutional players with a negligible footprint of just one property. This decentralized ownership model defines the local rental market.

Investor activity in Q1 2026 was robust, with landlords participating in 25.5% of all transactions. They are in a clear accumulation phase, buying 3.8 properties for every one they sold. This aggressive buying is driven by smaller investors, as the market's single institutional entity was a net seller during the same period. A notable pricing dynamic emerged, where experienced investors secured better deals; institutional buyers paid 23.0% less than new single-property landlords, showcasing an efficiency that comes with scale and market knowledge.

The key takeaway from this analysis is the resilience and dominance of the small landlord. While national headlines often focus on institutional buyers, the reality in Burnet County is a market powered by local entrepreneurs. Companies tend to take over ownership structures for portfolios larger than six properties, but the vast majority of the market remains in the hands of individuals. This dynamic suggests a stable, community-based rental market where opportunities continue to attract new, small-scale investors rather than large corporations.

About This Report

Report Methodology

This report analyzes BatchData's Investor Pulse dataset, covering single-family residential (SFR) investor activity across the United States.

Data is extracted from 15 CSV files covering ownership, transactions, and pricing trends, then analyzed using AI-powered insights.

Property Counting Methodology:

Distinct Counts: All headline totals represent distinct properties. If 2+ landlords co-own the same property, it's counted only once. This provides accurate market representation.

Category Breakdowns: When analyzing by tier (01-09), owner type (Individual/Corporate), or occupancy status, properties with co-ownership across categories are counted once per category. This causes breakdowns to sum 2-4% higher than totals, and percentages may sum to 100-104%. This is expected and reflects co-ownership patterns.

Tier Properties Category
01-041-10Mom-and-Pop
05-0711-100Mid-Size
08101-1000Large
091000+Institutional
About BatchData

BatchData provides comprehensive real estate data and analytics, offering insights into property ownership, investor activity, and market trends across the United States.

The Investor Pulse dataset tracks single-family residential (SFR) investor behavior at national, state, county, and MSA levels.

For more information, visit batchdata.io or explore our API documentation.

Data Freshness
Report Generated July 22, 2026 at 03:14 AM
Data Period Q1 2026
Geography Level County
Geography Burnet (TX)
×
Chart Section2 Coverage
Chart Section2 Coverage
×
Chart Section3 Ownership Donut
Chart Section3 Ownership Donut
×
Chart Section3 Ownership Bar
Chart Section3 Ownership Bar
×
Chart Section4 Distribution
Chart Section4 Distribution
×
Chart Section5 Holdings
Chart Section5 Holdings
×
Chart Section6 Prices
Chart Section6 Prices
×
Chart Section6 Prices Alt
Chart Section6 Prices Alt
×
Chart Section6 Yoy Comparison
Chart Section6 Yoy Comparison
×
Chart Section6 Trends
Chart Section6 Trends
×
Chart Section7 Purchases
Chart Section7 Purchases
×
Chart Section7 Tiers
Chart Section7 Tiers
×
Chart Section8 Distribution
Chart Section8 Distribution
×
Chart Section8 Prices
Chart Section8 Prices
×
Chart Section8 Prices Q4
Chart Section8 Prices Q4
×
Chart Section8 Prices 2020
Chart Section8 Prices 2020
×
Chart Section8 Yoy Comparison
Chart Section8 Yoy Comparison
×
Chart Section9 Ownership
Chart Section9 Ownership
×
Chart Section9 Growth
Chart Section9 Growth
×
Chart Section9 Growth Q4
Chart Section9 Growth Q4
×
Chart Section9 Yoy Comparison
Chart Section9 Yoy Comparison
×
Chart Section10 Top Regions
Chart Section10 Top Regions
×
Chart Section10 Top Pct
Chart Section10 Top Pct
×
Chart Section11 Buysell
Chart Section11 Buysell
×
Chart Section11 Buysell Price
Chart Section11 Buysell Price
×
Chart Section11 Yoy All Landlords
Chart Section11 Yoy All Landlords
×
Chart Section11 Institutional
Chart Section11 Institutional
×
Chart Section11 Institutional Price
Chart Section11 Institutional Price
×
Chart Section11 Yoy Institutional
Chart Section11 Yoy Institutional
×
Chart Section12 Transactions
Chart Section12 Transactions
×
Chart Section12 Prices
Chart Section12 Prices
×
Chart Section12 Prices Detail
Chart Section12 Prices Detail

Licensing & Usage Rights

This report, data, and all visual analyses are the property of BatchData © 2026 BatchService, Inc. and are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).

You MAY: Download, share, or excerpt this content for personal or non-commercial purposes, provided you give clear attribution to BatchData with a link back to this original page.

You MAY NOT: Use this data commercially, resell or redistribute it as your own, or publish modified versions.

For commercial licensing: batchdata.io/contact-sales

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 - creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

How to cite this report

BatchData. (2026). Q1 2026 Burnet (TX) Report. BatchService, Inc. Retrieved from https://reports.batchdata.io/investorpulse-reports/2026-q1-county-tx-burnet/. Licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.