Clark (WI) Investor Pulse Report (2026-Q1)

In Clark County, WI, investors own 184 Single-Family Residential (SFR) properties, representing a modest 1.9% of the total 9,743 SFRs in the market.

Ownership is led by individual investors who hold 109 properties (59.2%), while company investors own the remaining 81 properties (44.0%).

This split extends to the landlord entities themselves, with 143 individual landlords outnumbering the 74 company landlords, reinforcing the market's small-investor character.

A striking 83.7% of investor-owned properties (154 total) were purchased with cash, indicating a low reliance on financing, as only 30 properties are currently financed.

The primary strategy for investors in this area is rental income, with 137 properties (74.5%) of the portfolio actively rented out to tenants.

In Q1 2026, investors demonstrated a significant pricing advantage, acquiring property for an average of $75,000, which is 63.9% below the $207,877 average paid by traditional homeowners.

This translates to a substantial cash discount of $132,877 per property, although this figure is based on a very small number of landlord transactions during the quarter.

The price gap has been highly inconsistent. In Q2 2025, landlords paid 73.7% less ($60,000 vs. $228,096), but in Q3 2025, they anomalously paid a 138.0% premium based on transaction data.

This volatility highlights a market with infrequent investor activity, where individual deals can heavily skew quarterly averages rather than indicating a stable trend.

Overall acquisition prices for landlords have fluctuated significantly, from an average of $211,200 during the 2020-2023 period to $382,571 in 2024 and back down in recent quarters.

Investor purchasing activity slowed to a near halt in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring only 1 of the 90 total SFR properties sold in Clark County.

This low volume gives landlords a market share of just 1.1% for the quarter, indicating a significant pullback in acquisition compared to other buyer types.

The entirety of this purchasing activity came from the mom-and-pop segment, with a single landlord in the 6-10 property tier making the only investor acquisition.

Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) were completely inactive on the buy-side, acquiring zero properties and ceding the market entirely to smaller players.

This lack of activity from larger investors and the minimal participation from smaller ones suggest a cautious or disinterested stance toward the Clark County market at the end of 2025.

The investor landscape in Clark County is overwhelmingly controlled by small-scale operators. Mom-and-pop landlords (owning 1-10 properties) hold 89.2% of all investor-owned SFRs.

Single-property landlords form the bedrock of this market, owning 130 properties, which constitutes a massive 70.3% share of the entire investor portfolio.

In sharp contrast, institutional investors with 1,000+ properties have a negligible footprint, owning just 2 properties, or 1.1% of the investor-held housing stock.

Mid-size investors (11-1,000 properties) also have a limited presence, collectively owning the remaining 9.7% of the portfolio, further highlighting the market's granular nature.

This distribution reveals a market unattractive to or undiscovered by large-scale capital, where real estate investing remains a local, small-portfolio endeavor.

While individual investors own the most properties overall, company ownership becomes dominant very early in portfolio size. The crossover point occurs at the two-property tier, where companies own 60.0% of properties.

Individuals overwhelmingly control the entry-level single-property tier, holding 92 of the 130 properties (a 67.6% share).

As portfolios grow, company ownership consolidates rapidly. Companies own 90.9% of properties in the 6-10 unit tier and 81.8% in the 11-20 unit tier.

This pattern suggests that investors who plan to scale beyond a single rental property are more likely to use a corporate entity for their holdings in Clark County.

Even among the smallest multi-property landlords (3-5 properties), individuals maintain a majority at 63.2%, showing the 2-property mark as the key inflection point for incorporating.

Investor ownership in Clark County is not widespread but is instead concentrated in a few key areas. The zip code 54436 is the primary hub, containing 28 investor-owned properties.

Following 54436, the next most popular area is 54437 with 19 properties, showing a significant drop-off in activity in other parts of the county.

The areas with the highest counts of investor properties also lead in ownership rates. Zip code 54436 has the highest penetration at 4.9%, followed by 54437 at 2.4%.

This alignment between high counts and high rates suggests that investors are targeting specific neighborhoods rather than diversifying across the county.

Beyond the top two zip codes, investor presence is minimal, with areas like 54421 and 54446 having only 5 and 4 investor-owned properties respectively.

A clear shift in market sentiment occurred between 2024 and 2025. Landlords were net buyers in 2024, acquiring 3 more properties than they sold (13 buys vs. 10 sells).

However, this trend reversed in 2025, with landlords becoming net sellers, divesting 4 more properties than they acquired (14 buys vs. 18 sells).

This selling trend has continued into the new year, with Q1 2026 showing balanced activity of 1 buy and 1 sell, but prior quarters in 2025 showed a strong disposition trend.

Institutional investors (1,000+ units) have been consistently divesting from the Clark County market, registering as net sellers in both 2024 (net -1) and 2025 (net -3).

The combined data indicates a cooling investor market where both large and small landlords are either reducing their portfolios or have ceased expansion.

In Q1 2026, landlords had a minimal impact on the Clark County transaction market, participating in only 1 of the 135 total SFR sales.

This represents a landlord transaction share of just 0.7%, underscoring the extremely low level of investor activity in the current market.

The sole transaction was conducted by a small landlord in the 6-10 property tier, who purchased a property for $75,000.

There was no recorded activity from the largest (institutional) or smallest (single-property) investor tiers during the quarter, showing a lack of both new entrants and large-scale acquisitions.

Furthermore, the transaction was not an inter-landlord sale, as 0% of landlord purchases came from other landlords, suggesting any acquisitions are sourced from the general market.