Madison (ID) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Madison (ID)
7,101
Total Investors in Madison (ID)
2,115
Investor Owned SFR in Madison (ID)
1,663(23.4%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
1,770
SFR Owned
1,281
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
345
SFR Owned
466
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 1,663 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 Madison County, Acquiring 35% of Q4 Homes at a 33% Discount
Investors now own 23.4% of all single-family homes in Madison County, with small 'mom-and-pop' landlords controlling a staggering 97.6% of that portfolio. In Q4 2025, investors were aggressive net buyers, capturing 35.0% of all market purchases and paying an average of 33.1% less than traditional homeowners, while institutional investors remained effectively absent from the market.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 1,663 SFR properties in Madison County, with individuals holding a 77.0% majority.
The investor portfolio is largely owned outright, with cash purchases (1,292) outpacing financed ones (371) by more than 3-to-1. The vast majority of these properties (1,616) are classified as rented. Individual landlords (1,770) vastly outnumber company landlords (345), reinforcing the market's small-investor character.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
In Q4, landlords paid 33.1% less than homeowners, securing a $168,336 average discount per property.
This Q4 discount represents a dramatic widening of the price gap compared to previous quarters, which saw discounts of 6.9% in Q3 and 19.3% in Q2. Landlord acquisition prices have fluctuated, with the Q4 average of $339,604 being lower than the pandemic-era average of $401,191.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords captured 35.0% of all SFR purchases in Q4 2025, buying 28 of the 80 homes sold.
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) were the driving force, accounting for 89.3% of all investor purchases. Institutional investors with 1,000+ properties made zero acquisitions. The market saw an influx of 33 new single-property landlord entities this quarter.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords control 97.6% of all investor-owned SFR housing in Madison County.
This overwhelming majority leaves a minuscule 0.1% market share for institutional investors (1,000+ properties). Single-property landlords alone make up the largest segment, owning 1,158 properties, which is 65.8% of the entire investor portfolio.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Companies become the majority property owners starting in the 6-10 property tier, holding 58.1%.
Despite individuals making up the vast majority of landlords overall, companies solidify their control in larger portfolios, owning 88.0% of properties in the 11-20 tier. In the largest portfolios, individuals still maintain some presence, but companies are the dominant structure for scaling operations.
Geographic Distribution
The 83440 zip code is the epicenter of investor activity, holding 1,368 investor-owned properties.
While 83440 has the highest volume, the 83436 zip code has the highest concentration, with a 63.4% investor ownership rate. Investor activity is highly localized, with the top zip code by count holding over 50 times more investor properties than the next largest.
Historical Transactions
Landlords are aggressive net buyers, acquiring 6.5 properties for every 1 they sold in Q4 2025.
This strong accumulation trend was consistent throughout the year, with 163 buys versus 24 sells in 2025. In contrast, institutional investors (1000+ tier) were effectively neutral, with only 1 buy and 1 sell recorded for all of 2024, showing no significant market activity.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlord-involved transactions comprised 30.2% of all market activity in Q4 2025.
Single-property landlords drove this activity, conducting 33 of the 39 investor transactions. These new or small-scale investors paid an average of $339,604. Notably, 18.2% of their purchases were sourced from other landlords, indicating some churn within the investor community.

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 1,663 SFR properties in Madison County, with individuals holding a 77.0% majority.
Detailed Findings

Investors hold a significant footprint in Madison County, owning 1,663 single-family residential properties, which constitutes 23.4% of the total 7,101 SFRs in the market.

The market is overwhelmingly characterized by individual ownership, with 1,281 properties (77.0%) held by individuals compared to just 466 (28.0%) by companies. This trend extends to the landlord entities themselves, where 1,770 individual investors dwarf the 345 company investors.

A clear preference for un-leveraged assets is evident, as cash-owned properties (1,292) significantly outnumber financed properties (371). This suggests a financially stable investor base that is less sensitive to interest rate fluctuations.

The portfolio is heavily geared towards rental income, with 1,616 properties actively rented. This high rental penetration underscores the primary business objective of the local investor base: providing housing supply to the rental market.

The stark difference between the number of individual landlords (1,770) and the properties they own (1,281) compared to company landlords (345) and their properties (466) highlights that while individuals are more numerous, companies, on average, manage slightly larger portfolios.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
In Q4, landlords paid 33.1% less than homeowners, securing a $168,336 average discount per property.
Detailed Findings

Investors in Madison County demonstrated a powerful pricing advantage in Q4 2025, acquiring properties for an average of $339,604. This was a remarkable 33.1% less than the $507,940 paid by traditional homeowners, translating to a substantial $168,336 discount on the average transaction.

The price gap between landlords and homeowners widened significantly throughout the year. The 33.1% discount in Q4 is a sharp increase from the 6.9% discount observed in Q3 ($419,625 vs $450,561) and the 19.3% discount in Q2 ($394,763 vs $489,415), indicating a strengthening negotiating position for investors or a focus on undervalued assets as the year closed.

Comparing recent activity to historical data shows price volatility. The average Q4 2025 purchase price of $339,604 is considerably lower than the average price paid during the 2020-2023 boom years ($401,191), suggesting a market correction or a strategic shift toward lower-priced inventory.

While landlords purchased zero properties in 2024 and 2025 according to the timeframe data, the quarterly price comparison data reveals active purchasing. This discrepancy suggests that the summary data may be incomplete, but the quarterly pricing trends clearly show investors consistently buying below the homeowner market rate.

The escalating discount throughout 2025 suggests that investors are becoming more adept at identifying and securing deals well below market price, potentially targeting properties that require renovations or are otherwise less appealing to traditional buyers.

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 captured 35.0% of all SFR purchases in Q4 2025, buying 28 of the 80 homes sold.
Detailed Findings

Investor activity surged in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring 28 of the 80 single-family homes sold, capturing a significant 35.0% of the total market share.

The quarter was dominated by small-scale investors. Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) were responsible for 25 purchases, representing 89.3% of all landlord acquisitions and underscoring their critical role in the local market.

In stark contrast, large-scale institutional investors (Tier 09) were completely inactive, making zero purchases in Q4. This highlights a market driven by local entrepreneurs rather than large corporations.

The market continues to attract new entrants, with 33 new single-property landlord entities making their first purchase in Q4. These new investors acquired 22 properties, accounting for 78.6% of all investor-bought homes this quarter.

Activity was sparse among mid-size investors, with only one property each being purchased by landlords in the 21-50, 51-100, and 101-1000 property tiers. This further reinforces the market's concentration at the smallest end of the investor spectrum.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords control 97.6% of all investor-owned SFR housing in Madison County.
Detailed Findings

The investor landscape in Madison County is unequivocally dominated by small-scale operators. Mom-and-pop landlords, who own between 1 and 10 properties, control a massive 97.6% of all investor-owned single-family homes.

First-time or single-holding investors are the backbone of the market. The 'Single-property' tier alone accounts for 1,158 properties, representing 65.8% of the total investor portfolio, demonstrating the highly fragmented nature of ownership.

Institutional investors (Tier 09, 1,000+ properties) have a negligible presence, owning just 2 properties, which translates to a mere 0.1% of the investor market. This finding directly counters the narrative of large corporate landlords controlling the housing supply in this area.

Ownership concentration dissipates rapidly as portfolio size increases. After the single-property tier, two-property owners hold 13.9% and landlords with 3-5 properties hold 14.4%, with all larger tiers holding less than 4% each.

The data confirms that the rental housing stock in Madison County is provided almost entirely by small, local investors, with mid-size and large-scale players having a minimal impact on the overall market structure.

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 starting in the 6-10 property tier, holding 58.1%.
Detailed Findings

While individual investors dominate the smaller end of the market, a clear crossover point occurs as portfolios grow. Companies become the majority stakeholders in the 6-10 property tier, owning 36 properties (58.1%) compared to the 26 owned by individuals (41.9%).

Company ownership becomes even more concentrated in larger tiers. In the 11-20 property bracket, companies control a commanding 88.0% of the homes, demonstrating that incorporation is the preferred structure for managing mid-sized portfolios.

At the entry level, individual ownership is the standard. For single-property landlords, individuals own 982 homes (81.2%) versus 227 for companies (18.8%), reflecting the typical starting point for a real estate investor.

The pattern reveals a distinct strategic shift: individuals initiate real estate investment, but scaling beyond a handful of properties typically involves forming a company, likely for liability protection and financial advantages.

Even in the two-property (31.0% company) and 3-5 property (34.5% company) tiers, a significant portion of owners have incorporated, suggesting that the move to a formal business structure happens relatively early in an investor's journey in Madison County.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
The 83440 zip code is the epicenter of investor activity, holding 1,368 investor-owned properties.
Detailed Findings

Investor ownership in Madison County is intensely concentrated geographically. The vast majority of activity is in the 83440 zip code, which contains 1,368 investor-owned properties, representing 22.4% of its housing stock.

For the highest market penetration, the 83436 zip code stands out with a 63.4% investor ownership rate. This indicates that nearly two-thirds of the SFR properties in this area are owned by investors, making it a rental-heavy submarket.

There is a significant disparity between the primary investment zone and other areas. The 1,368 properties in 83440 dwarf the counts in all other zip codes, such as 83448 with 250 properties and 83436 with just 26, highlighting a clear geographic preference.

The data distinguishes between areas with high raw counts and those with high ownership rates. While 83440 is the volume leader, smaller zip codes like 83436 and 83451 (32.4% rate) show deeper market saturation by investors relative to their size.

This geographic clustering suggests that investors are targeting specific neighborhoods, possibly driven by proximity to amenities, employment centers, or educational institutions like Brigham Young University-Idaho, which is located in the area.

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, acquiring 6.5 properties for every 1 they sold in Q4 2025.
Detailed Findings

Landlords in Madison County are in a strong accumulation phase, consistently buying far more properties than they sell. In Q4 2025, they were decisive net buyers, with 39 purchases against only 6 sales, a buy-to-sell ratio of 6.5 to 1.

This net-buyer trend has been sustained over time. Across all of 2025, landlords acquired 163 properties while divesting only 24, resulting in a net gain of 139 properties to their portfolios. The activity in 2024 was similar, with 182 buys and 35 sells.

The institutional investor tier (1,000+ properties) displays a starkly different behavior. Their activity is minimal to non-existent, with records showing only a single purchase and a single sale for the entirety of 2024, indicating they are neither accumulating nor divesting in this market.

The transaction data reveals a highly liquid and active market driven primarily by smaller investors who are confidently expanding their holdings. The consistent, high-volume net buying signals strong positive sentiment about the future of the local rental market.

The contrast between the aggressive acquisition strategy of the general landlord population and the dormancy of institutional players reinforces that Madison County's real estate investment market is fueled by local, smaller-scale capital.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
Landlord-involved transactions comprised 30.2% of all market activity in Q4 2025.
Detailed Findings

Investors were a major force in the Q4 2025 market, with landlord-involved purchases accounting for 39 of the 129 total transactions, a market share of 30.2%.

The transaction volume was heavily skewed towards the smallest investors. The 'Single-property' tier alone was responsible for 33 transactions, representing 84.6% of all landlord transaction activity for the quarter.

In contrast, institutional investors (Tier 09) recorded zero transactions in Q4, reinforcing their lack of participation in the market's transactional flow.

Intra-investor sales were a component of Q4 activity, particularly for new entrants. Of the 33 properties bought by single-property landlords, 6 (18.2%) were purchased from another landlord, suggesting a healthy level of portfolio trading.

The average purchase price for the most active segment, single-property landlords, was $339,604. The lack of transaction data for larger tiers prevents a price comparison, but it confirms the price point at which new investors are entering the Madison County 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

Small mom-and-pop investors dominate Madison County, owning 97.6% of rental homes and buying at a 33% discount.
Holdings
Landlords own 1,663 single-family properties in Madison County, representing 23.4% of the market. The portfolio is overwhelmingly controlled by individual investors, who own 1,281 of these homes (77.0%), compared to 466 (28.0%) owned by companies.
Pricing
In Q4 2025, landlords paid an average of 33.1% less than traditional homeowners, securing properties for $339,604 versus the homeowner price of $507,940—a significant discount of $168,336 per home.
Activity
Investors were highly active in Q4 2025, purchasing 28 homes, which is 35.0% of all sales. The market's growth is fueled by new entrants, with 33 new single-property landlord entities making acquisitions this quarter.
Market Share
The investor market is controlled by small operators, with mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) owning 97.6% of all investor-held SFRs. In stark contrast, institutional investors (1,000+ properties) hold a negligible 0.1% share.
Ownership Type
Individual investors form the base of the market, but companies become the majority owners in portfolios of 6-10 properties (58.1% share) and solidify their dominance in the 11-20 property tier (88.0% share), marking a clear shift as portfolios scale.
Transactions
Landlords in Madison County are strong net buyers, with a 6.5-to-1 buy/sell ratio in Q4 (39 buys vs. 6 sells). Institutional investors, however, are completely inactive, showing no net change in their minimal holdings.
Market Narrative

The single-family rental market in Madison County, Idaho, is defined by the overwhelming dominance of small, individual investors. Landlords control a significant 1,663 properties, making up 23.4% of the county's total SFR housing stock. This portfolio is not in the hands of large corporations; rather, 77.0% of these homes are owned by individuals. An astonishing 97.6% of all investor-owned properties are held by 'mom-and-pop' landlords with portfolios of 10 or fewer homes, while institutional firms with over 1,000 properties control a mere 0.1%, effectively marking their absence from the local market.

Investor behavior in Q4 2025 was characterized by aggressive acquisition at a steep discount. Capturing 35.0% of all homes sold, landlords demonstrated a powerful ability to secure assets well below market rates, paying an average of 33.1% less than traditional homeowners—a cash advantage of $168,336 per property. This activity is fueled by a constant influx of new entrants, with 33 new single-property landlords joining the market in the last quarter alone. Overall, landlords are in a strong accumulation phase, buying 6.5 properties for every one they sold, signaling deep confidence in the local rental economy.

The key takeaway for the Madison County housing market is that it operates as a grassroots ecosystem, shaped and supplied by local capital, not institutional directives. The primary source of rental housing comes from thousands of small operators who are actively growing their portfolios. This structure suggests a market that may be more resilient to national corporate strategy shifts but is highly sensitive to local economic conditions. The significant pricing power of investors indicates they are likely absorbing distressed or less-desirable inventory, a vital function in maintaining market liquidity.

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 12, 2026 at 02:01 AM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyMadison (ID)
×
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