Garfield (CO) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Garfield (CO)
15,374
Total Investors in Garfield (CO)
4,911
Investor Owned SFR in Garfield (CO)
3,670(23.9%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
4,240
SFR Owned
2,968
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
671
SFR Owned
742
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 3,670 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 Garfield County, Owning 99% of Investor SFRs and Paying Premiums
Investors own 3,670 SFR properties in Garfield County (23.9% of the market), with mom-and-pop landlords controlling a staggering 99.2% of that portfolio. In Q4, these small investors drove 100% of landlord purchases, paying a striking 40.8% premium over traditional homeowners and continuing a trend of aggressive accumulation with a 6.8x buy-to-sell ratio in 2025.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 3,670 SFRs in Garfield County, with individual landlords holding a dominant 80.9%.
The portfolio is split almost evenly between cash (1,971) and financed (1,699) properties. It is overwhelmingly rental-focused, with 99.3% (3,643) of all investor-owned properties designated as non-owner-occupied.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
Investors paid a significant 40.8% premium over homeowners in Q4, averaging $921,992 per purchase.
This trend of paying more than homeowners was consistent throughout 2025, with the premium reaching a high of 56.5% in Q3. Investors consistently outbid traditional buyers, paying between $132,763 and $452,728 more per property during the year.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords acquired 34.0% of all Garfield County SFRs sold in Q4, totaling 52 properties.
Mom-and-pop landlords drove 100% of this investor activity, with institutional investors making zero acquisitions. The market saw 71 new single-property landlords make their first purchase this quarter.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords have near-total control of the market, owning 99.2% of all investor-owned SFRs.
Single-property landlords alone own 83.5% of the investor-held housing stock (3,140 properties). In contrast, institutional investors (1000+ tier) have a negligible footprint, with just 4 properties, representing 0.1% of the portfolio.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Individuals dominate small portfolios, but companies become the majority owners starting at the 6-10 property tier.
In the 6-10 property tier, companies own 57.1% of homes. This company dominance accelerates in the 11-20 property tier, where they own 94.4% of the portfolio.
Geographic Distribution
Investor activity is most concentrated in zip codes 81601 and 81623, holding a combined 1,912 properties.
The highest investor ownership rate is found in 81637, where 84.6% of all SFRs are investor-owned. Zip code 81623 stands out for having both high volume (953 properties) and a high ownership rate (30.8%).
Historical Transactions
Landlords are aggressive net buyers in Garfield County, acquiring 6.8 properties for every one they sold in 2025.
This accumulation trend is consistent year-over-year, with a 7.0x buy-to-sell ratio recorded in 2024. Acquisition volume has remained remarkably stable, with 232 buys in 2025 versus 224 in 2024. Institutional investors made no transactions in 2025.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlords participated in 32.1% of all Q4 2025 transactions, entirely driven by mom-and-pop investors.
Different acquisition strategies emerged by tier: two-property landlords paid substantially more per property ($1,148,333 vs $847,132) and were eight times more likely to acquire property from another landlord (33.3% vs 4.2%) than new investors.

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 3,670 SFRs in Garfield County, with individual landlords holding a dominant 80.9%.
Detailed Findings

Investor ownership constitutes a significant portion of the housing market in Garfield County, with 3,670 single-family residences, or 23.9% of the total 15,374 SFRs, held by landlords.

The investor landscape is overwhelmingly composed of individuals rather than corporations. Individual landlords own 2,968 properties, making up 80.9% of the investor-owned market, compared to 742 properties (20.2%) owned by companies.

This individual dominance is also reflected in the entity count, where 4,240 of the 4,911 total landlords (86.3%) are individuals, reinforcing the 'mom-and-pop' character of the local rental market.

The financial structure of these holdings shows a near-even split between leveraged and unleveraged assets. Investors hold 1,971 properties with cash, slightly more than the 1,699 properties that are financed.

The portfolio's purpose is clearly for rental income, as 3,643 of the 3,670 properties (99.3%) are non-owner-occupied, confirming their status as investment assets contributing to the local rental supply.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
Investors paid a significant 40.8% premium over homeowners in Q4, averaging $921,992 per purchase.
Detailed Findings

Contrary to common market assumptions, investors in Garfield County paid a substantial premium for properties compared to traditional homeowners in Q4 2025. The average investor acquisition price was $921,992, which is $267,007, or 40.8%, higher than the average homeowner price of $654,985.

This pricing dynamic was not a one-time event but a consistent pattern throughout 2025. In Q3, the premium was even more pronounced at 56.5% ($1,254,700 vs. $801,972), and it was also significant in Q2 at 42.2% ($1,123,187 vs. $790,095).

The willingness of investors to pay more suggests a highly competitive market where investors may be targeting properties with specific features (like rental potential or location) that command higher prices, or they are simply more aggressive in their bidding to secure assets.

The smallest premium observed during the year was in Q1, yet investors still paid 16.3% more than homeowners, a difference of $132,763 per property.

This sustained trend challenges the narrative that investors primarily seek discounted properties and indicates they are a primary force in driving up local market prices.

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

Current Quarter Purchase Summary

Analysis of Q4 2025 purchase activity by investor tier and type

Chart Section7 Purchases
Chart Section7 Tiers
Key Insight
Landlords acquired 34.0% of all Garfield County SFRs sold in Q4, totaling 52 properties.
Detailed Findings

Investors represented a major purchasing force in the Q4 2025 market, acquiring 52 of the 153 total SFRs sold, which translates to a 34.0% market share of all purchases.

The entirety of this purchasing activity was driven by small-scale 'mom-and-pop' investors (owning 1-10 properties). Institutional investors with portfolios over 1,000 properties were completely absent from the market, making zero acquisitions.

New entrants were the primary driver of investor demand. Single-property landlords, often making their first investment, accounted for 47 of the 52 properties purchased (90.4%).

This influx of new investors is significant, with 71 distinct entities purchasing a single property in Q4, signaling strong growth at the smallest end of the investor spectrum.

The data clearly shows that the recent growth in Garfield County's rental market is fueled by new and existing small, local investors rather than large, out-of-state corporations.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords have near-total control of the market, owning 99.2% of all investor-owned SFRs.
Detailed Findings

The ownership structure of investor-held real estate in Garfield County is overwhelmingly dominated by small landlords. Those owning 1-10 properties (Tiers 01-04) collectively control 99.2% of the entire investor SFR portfolio.

The concentration at the smallest tier is particularly stark, with single-property landlords (Tier 01) alone accounting for 83.5% of all investor-owned homes, totaling 3,140 properties.

In stark contrast, institutional investors (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) have a functionally nonexistent presence in the county, owning a mere 4 properties, which amounts to just 0.1% of the investor market.

This data firmly debunks any narrative of large corporations controlling the local rental market. Instead, it reveals a highly fragmented market composed of thousands of individual owners.

The mid-size tiers also represent a very small fraction of ownership, with landlords owning 11-1000 properties combined holding less than 1% of the total investor portfolio.

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
Individuals dominate small portfolios, but companies become the majority owners starting at the 6-10 property tier.
Detailed Findings

A clear pattern emerges when analyzing ownership by entity type across portfolio sizes: investors tend to be individuals at the start and incorporate as they scale.

Individual investors overwhelmingly control the smallest tiers. For single-property landlords, individuals own 2,646 properties (83.4%) compared to just 528 for companies (16.6%).

The crossover point occurs in the 6-10 property tier (Tier 04). At this level, companies take a majority stake for the first time, owning 20 properties (57.1%) versus 15 for individuals (42.9%).

This trend toward corporate ownership becomes even more pronounced in larger portfolios. In the 11-20 property tier, companies own 17 of the 18 properties, a commanding 94.4% share.

This progression suggests that while the barrier to entry is low for individuals, growing a real estate portfolio beyond a few properties often coincides with a strategic shift to a more formal corporate structure for liability and financial purposes.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor activity is most concentrated in zip codes 81601 and 81623, holding a combined 1,912 properties.
Detailed Findings

Geographic analysis reveals significant investor concentration in specific zip codes within Garfield County. The largest volumes of investor-owned properties are in 81601 (959 properties) and 81623 (953 properties).

However, the highest market penetration is in zip code 81637, where landlords own an astonishing 84.6% of all single-family residences, making it a market almost entirely defined by investors.

Zip code 81630 also shows extremely high investor concentration, with a 50.0% ownership rate.

A key area of interest is zip code 81623, which ranks second for total investor property count (953) and third for ownership rate (30.8%), indicating it is a core hub for both the scale and density of rental housing.

This distinction between high-volume and high-penetration areas highlights different market dynamics, from broad rental markets like 81601 to investor-saturated submarkets like 81637.

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
Key Insight
Landlords are aggressive net buyers in Garfield County, acquiring 6.8 properties for every one they sold in 2025.
Detailed Findings

Transactional data shows a clear and sustained trend of portfolio growth among landlords in Garfield County. In 2025, investors were strong net buyers, purchasing 232 properties while selling only 34, a buy-to-sell ratio of 6.8 to 1.

This behavior is not a recent development. The pattern was nearly identical in 2024, when landlords bought 224 properties and sold 32, resulting in an even higher 7-to-1 buy/sell ratio.

The consistency in purchasing volume, with 232 acquisitions in 2025 and 224 in 2024, signals a stable, long-term strategy of accumulation across the investor community.

Quarterly data from 2025 reinforces this finding. In Q4, landlords bought 77 properties and sold only 9, continuing the aggressive expansion of their holdings.

In stark contrast, institutional-grade investors (1000+ properties) have been completely inactive in the market throughout 2025, after being marginal net buyers in 2024 (3 buys, 1 sell).

Current Quarter Transactions

Q4 2025 transaction analysis by tier, price, and inter-landlord activity

Key Insight
Landlords participated in 32.1% of all Q4 2025 transactions, entirely driven by mom-and-pop investors.
Detailed Findings

In Q4 2025, landlords were a party to 77 of the 240 total SFR transactions in Garfield County, representing a significant 32.1% share of all market activity.

This activity was exclusively driven by mom-and-pop landlords, with those in the 1-5 property tiers accounting for 100% of these transactions. Institutional investors made no moves in the quarter.

A notable pricing difference appeared between the smallest tiers. Two-property landlords paid an average of $1,148,333, nearly $300,000 more than the $847,132 average paid by single-property investors.

The data also reveals differing sourcing strategies. New, single-property investors rarely bought from other landlords (only 4.2% of transactions). In contrast, slightly more established two-property investors were much more active in the inter-landlord market, with 33.3% of their purchases coming from existing landlords.

This suggests that as investors gain experience, they may be more likely to engage in off-market or targeted acquisitions from other landlords, whereas new entrants are more commonly competing for homes on the open market.

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 command 99% of Garfield County's rental market, driving purchases and paying significant premiums.
Holdings
Landlords own 3,670 SFR properties (23.9% of Garfield County's market), with individual investors holding a dominant 2,968 (80.9%) of these homes compared to 742 (20.2%) for companies.
Pricing
In a striking local trend, landlords paid a 40.8% premium over homeowners in Q4, an average of $267,007 more per property ($921,992 vs $654,985).
Activity
Q4 landlord activity was robust, accounting for 34.0% of all sales (52 properties), driven entirely by small investors, including 71 new single-property landlords entering the market.
Market Share
Small mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control a near-total 99.2% of investor housing, while institutional investors (1000+) own a negligible 0.1%.
Ownership Type
Individual investors dominate smaller portfolios, but companies become the majority owners in portfolios of 6-10 properties, signaling a shift to formal entities as investors scale.
Transactions
Landlords are strong net buyers with a 6.8x buy/sell ratio in 2025 (232 buys vs 34 sells), while institutional investors have been entirely inactive in the county during 2025.
Market Narrative

The investor landscape in Garfield County is defined by the overwhelming dominance of small, individual landlords. Investors own a substantial 23.9% of the single-family housing stock, totaling 3,670 properties. This market is highly fragmented, with 'mom-and-pop' landlords (1-10 properties) controlling 99.2% of all investor-held homes. Individual owners account for 80.9% of these properties, while large-scale institutional investors have a virtually nonexistent footprint at just 0.1%.

Investor behavior in Garfield County is characterized by aggressive acquisition and a willingness to pay premium prices. In Q4 2025, landlords purchased 34.0% of all homes sold, with 100% of this activity coming from small investors. In a stark departure from national trends, these buyers paid 40.8% more than traditional homeowners. This pattern of accumulation is long-standing, with landlords maintaining a 6.8-to-1 buy-to-sell ratio throughout 2025, consistently expanding their portfolios while institutional players remained on the sidelines.

The key takeaway for the Garfield County housing market is that its dynamics are driven by a large base of local investors, not corporate entities. This group is actively growing, paying top-dollar for assets, and significantly influencing both housing availability and pricing. The high premiums paid by investors create a fiercely competitive environment for traditional homebuyers and signal a strong belief in the long-term value and rental demand within the region.

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.

TierPropertiesCategory
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 GeneratedMarch 10, 2026 at 06:09 PM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyGarfield (CO)
×
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 Section12 Transactions
Chart Section12 Transactions
×
Chart Section12 Prices
Chart Section12 Prices
×
Chart Section12 Prices Detail
Chart Section12 Prices Detail