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

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Payette (ID)
7,694
Total Investors in Payette (ID)
982
Investor Owned SFR in Payette (ID)
910(11.8%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
777
SFR Owned
631
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
205
SFR Owned
308
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 910 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 Investors Dominate Payette County's Rental Market with 94.5% Ownership Amid Volatile Q4 Pricing
Investors own 910 SFR properties in Payette County, representing 11.8% of the market, with mom-and-pop landlords controlling a staggering 94.5% of that portfolio. In Q4, landlord purchase activity was modest at 5.2% of sales, but marked by an anomalous 108.3% price premium over homeowners. Throughout 2025, landlords remained net buyers, steadily increasing their holdings.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 910 properties in Payette County, with individuals holding 69.3%.
Cash is the dominant financing strategy, with 672 properties (73.8%) owned outright versus 238 financed. The investor portfolio is overwhelmingly rental-focused, with 855 of the 910 properties (94.0%) being non-owner-occupied. Individual landlords (777) significantly outnumber company landlords (205) by nearly 4-to-1.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
Landlords paid a 108.3% premium over homeowners in Q4, an anomaly in pricing trends.
This Q4 premium of $402,858 per property ($774,725 vs $371,867) marks a dramatic reversal from Q1, when landlords secured a 55.1% discount. This volatility suggests highly targeted or atypical purchases, as prior quarters showed much smaller premiums of 3.1% to 5.2%.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords acquired 5.2% of homes sold in Q4 2025, with mom-and-pop investors making 100% of purchases.
Investor activity was exclusively driven by small landlords, who purchased all 6 investor-acquired properties. The market saw 3 new single-property investors enter in Q4, while institutional investors (1,000+ properties) made zero acquisitions.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords control 94.5% of all investor-owned homes in Payette County.
Single-property investors form the bedrock of the market, alone owning 535 properties (55.7% of the total). In stark contrast, institutional investors with portfolios of 1,000+ properties hold just 2 properties, a mere 0.2% share.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Companies become the majority owners in portfolios sized at 6-10 properties.
While individuals dominate smaller tiers, owning 80.6% of single-property portfolios, a crossover occurs in the 6-10 property tier where companies hold a 64.3% majority. This signals a shift toward formal business structures as portfolios scale.
Geographic Distribution
Investor activity is concentrated in zip codes 83619 (Payette) and 83661 (New Plymouth).
These two zip codes alone account for 696 investor-owned properties, 76.5% of the county's total. However, the highest investor penetration rate is found in zip code 83605 (Fruitland), where investors own 50.0% of the SFR housing stock.
Historical Transactions
Payette County landlords remain consistent net buyers, acquiring 2.7 properties for every one they sold in 2025.
This trend held steady in the most recent quarter, with 8 properties bought and 5 sold in Q4 2025. Over the full year, landlords expanded their portfolios by a net of 45 properties, with 71 acquisitions versus 26 sales. There was no recorded transaction activity for institutional investors.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlords were involved in 4.4% of all Q4 property transactions, with zero trading between investors.
All 8 landlord transactions were conducted by mom-and-pop investors, with no activity from larger entities. Notably, 0% of these purchases came from other landlords, suggesting investors are exclusively buying from homeowners or new construction. Pricing showed extreme variance, from $106,400 for single-property buyers to $1,443,050 for a two-property buyer.

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 910 properties in Payette County, with individuals holding 69.3%.
Detailed Findings

Investors hold a significant 11.8% share of the single-family residential market in Payette County, totaling 910 properties.

The investor landscape is dominated by individual owners, who control 631 properties (69.3%), compared to 308 properties (33.8%) held by companies. This indicates a market driven primarily by local, smaller-scale investment rather than large corporations.

A strong indicator of market stability and investor liquidity is the preference for cash purchases, with 672 properties (73.8%) held free and clear, more than double the 238 properties that are financed.

The portfolio is clearly geared towards rental income, as 855 properties (94.0%) are non-owner-occupied, establishing these holdings as a core component of the local rental housing supply.

By entity count, individual landlords are the overwhelming majority, with 777 individuals compared to just 205 companies, reinforcing the 'mom-and-pop' character of the county's real estate investment scene.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
Landlords paid a 108.3% premium over homeowners in Q4, an anomaly in pricing trends.
Detailed Findings

In a striking reversal of typical market behavior, landlords in Q4 2025 paid an average price of $774,725, representing an unprecedented 108.3% premium over traditional homeowners, who paid $371,867.

This massive $402,858 price gap in Q4 stands in stark contrast to the rest of the year. In Q1 2025, landlords achieved a deep discount of 55.1% ($195,150 less than homeowners), while Q2 and Q3 saw modest premiums of 5.2% and 3.1% respectively.

The extreme price spike in Q4, based on a small number of transactions, suggests either the acquisition of unique high-value properties or potential data outliers skewing the average, rather than a broad market trend.

Looking at longer-term trends, the average landlord acquisition price in 2025 ($424,821) was nearly identical to 2024 ($422,158), indicating relative price stability year-over-year despite the quarterly volatility.

However, prices show significant appreciation from the 2020-2023 period, where the average acquisition price was $332,869, signaling a 27.6% increase in what landlords are paying post-pandemic.

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 5.2% of homes sold in Q4 2025, with mom-and-pop investors making 100% of purchases.
Detailed Findings

Investor purchasing activity was limited in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring just 6 of the 115 SFR properties sold, a market share of 5.2%.

The entirety of Q4 investor acquisitions was driven by mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who accounted for 100% of the activity. This highlights a complete absence of purchasing from mid-size or institutional investors during the quarter.

New market entrants are a key component of this activity, with 3 new single-property landlords making their first investment purchase, representing half of all investor-acquired properties.

The small landlord (3-5 properties) tier was also active, with 3 entities purchasing 2 properties, while one two-property landlord added a single property to their portfolio.

The lack of any purchases from investors holding more than 10 properties signals a cautious approach from larger players, leaving the acquisition landscape entirely to smaller, local buyers in Q4.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords control 94.5% of all investor-owned homes in Payette County.
Detailed Findings

The ownership structure in Payette County is overwhelmingly dominated by small investors, with mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) controlling a combined 94.5% of the investor-owned SFR market.

First-time or single-holding investors are the single largest group, with 535 properties (55.7%) held in one-property portfolios, underscoring the granular, decentralized nature of rental ownership.

The combined share of all mid-size to large investors (11-1000 properties) is minimal, collectively owning just 5.3% of the investor-held housing stock.

Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) have a negligible footprint in the county, owning only 2 properties, which translates to a 0.2% market share. This finding defies the common narrative of large corporate dominance in residential real estate.

The data clearly illustrates that the rental market in Payette County is supported by a broad base of small, local landlords rather than a few consolidated entities.

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 owners in portfolios sized at 6-10 properties.
Detailed Findings

A distinct pattern emerges in ownership structure as portfolios grow: individuals dominate the lower tiers while companies take over in larger ones. The crossover point occurs in the 6-10 property tier, where companies own 36 properties (64.3%) versus 20 owned by individuals.

Individual investors form the backbone of the entry-level market, owning 445 (80.6%) of single-property portfolios and 70 (66.7%) of two-property portfolios.

Even in the small landlord tier (3-5 properties), ownership is nearly split, with individuals holding a slight majority at 112 properties (52.3%) compared to 102 for companies (47.7%).

Interestingly, in the small-medium tier of 11-20 properties, individual ownership surprisingly resurges to a 75.9% majority, suggesting that even as some landlords incorporate, many continue to operate under personal names.

This trend indicates that while formal incorporation becomes more common with portfolio growth, a significant number of mid-size investors in Payette County continue to prefer individual ownership.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor activity is concentrated in zip codes 83619 (Payette) and 83661 (New Plymouth).
Detailed Findings

The vast majority of investor-owned properties in Payette County are concentrated in two primary zip codes: 83619 (Payette) and 83661 (New Plymouth), which contain 350 and 346 properties respectively.

Together, these two areas represent 76.5% of all investor-owned SFRs in the county, indicating a clear geographic focus for rental investment.

While leading in raw counts, these top zip codes have moderate investor ownership rates of 12.7% (83619) and 10.9% (83661).

In contrast, the highest market penetration is seen in smaller zip codes. Zip code 83605 (Fruitland) has the highest rate, with 50.0% of its properties owned by investors, followed by 83617 at 28.6% and 83607 at 20.9%.

This distinction between high-volume and high-penetration areas reveals different market dynamics, with widespread investment in the county's population centers and highly concentrated ownership in smaller, niche communities.

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
Key Insight
Payette County landlords remain consistent net buyers, acquiring 2.7 properties for every one they sold in 2025.
Detailed Findings

Landlords in Payette County are consistently in an accumulation phase, acting as net buyers across all observed timeframes.

In Q4 2025, landlords demonstrated this continued growth by purchasing 8 properties while only selling 5, resulting in a net gain of 3 properties for the quarter.

This behavior is part of a year-long trend. For the entirety of 2025, landlords acquired 71 SFR properties and sold just 26, yielding a strong buy-to-sell ratio of 2.73-to-1 and a net portfolio expansion of 45 homes.

Transaction velocity was highest in Q2 2025, when landlords made 35 purchases against 11 sales, marking the peak of acquisition activity for the year.

The data for 2024 shows an even more aggressive acquisition trend, with 96 buys versus 31 sells, indicating that while landlords are still net buyers, the pace of acquisition has moderated slightly in 2025.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
Landlords were involved in 4.4% of all Q4 property transactions, with zero trading between investors.
Detailed Findings

Landlord transactions represented a small fraction of the overall market in Q4 2025, accounting for just 8 of the 181 total SFR transactions, a 4.4% share.

Activity was confined exclusively to mom-and-pop investors, with landlords in the 1-5 property tiers conducting all 8 transactions. There was no transactional activity from institutional investors.

A significant finding is the complete lack of inter-landlord trading. 100% of investor purchases were sourced from the open market (e.g., homeowners), with 0% bought from another landlord, indicating a lack of portfolio churning among investors.

Purchase prices displayed extreme volatility between tiers. Single-property buyers paid a low average of $106,400, while a two-property buyer acquired a property for $1,443,050, suggesting highly diverse acquisition strategies or property types.

This quarter's transaction data paints a picture of a quiet but targeted acquisition environment, led by small investors buying from traditional homeowners at widely varying price points.

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 Landlords Command 94.5% of Payette County's Investor Market, Defying Corporate Narratives
Holdings
Investors own 910 single-family residential properties in Payette County, ID, representing 11.8% of the total market. Individual investors hold a commanding 69.3% majority (631 properties), with companies owning the remaining 30.8% (308 properties).
Pricing
In a highly unusual Q4, landlords paid an average of $774,725, a 108.3% premium over traditional homeowners ($371,867), representing a staggering $402,858 price difference that suggests targeted, high-value acquisitions.
Activity
Landlords purchased 6 properties in Q4, accounting for 5.2% of all sales, with activity driven entirely by small investors. The quarter saw the entrance of 3 new single-property landlords, signaling continued grassroots market participation.
Market Share
Small 'mom-and-pop' landlords (1-10 properties) overwhelmingly dominate the market, controlling 94.5% of all investor-owned housing. Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) have a negligible presence, owning just 0.2% of the portfolio.
Ownership Type
Individual investors are the primary owners in smaller portfolios, but companies become the majority owners in the 6-10 property tier, where they control 64.3% of properties, indicating a shift to formal structures as investments scale.
Transactions
Landlords in Payette County are consistently net buyers, acquiring 2.7 properties for every one sold during 2025 (71 buys vs. 26 sells). There was no recorded buying or selling activity from institutional-level investors.
Market Narrative

The real estate investor landscape in Payette County, ID is fundamentally defined by small, local participants, not large-scale corporations. Investors own 910 properties, 11.8% of the county's single-family housing stock, but this ownership is highly decentralized. Mom-and-pop landlords (owning 1-10 properties) control a commanding 94.5% of this portfolio, with individuals (69.3%) far outnumbering companies (30.8%). Institutional investors have a virtually nonexistent footprint, owning just 0.2% of investor-held homes, a figure that starkly contrasts with national headlines about corporate landlords.

In terms of recent behavior, investors have been measured but consistently acquisitive. They acted as net buyers throughout 2025 and purchased 5.2% of homes sold in the fourth quarter. This activity was exclusively driven by mom-and-pop buyers, including three new market entrants. Q4 pricing behavior was an extreme anomaly, with landlords paying a 108.3% premium over homeowners. This suggests that the few active investors were targeting specific, high-value assets rather than competing in the general market, a strategy that differs greatly from the discount-seeking behavior often seen elsewhere.

The key takeaway for the Payette County housing market is its insulation from large, institutional capital. The market's stability and rental supply are in the hands of a broad base of local individuals and small businesses. While they remain in an expansionary mode, their purchasing is not aggressive enough to dominate overall sales. The market's future trajectory will be shaped by the collective decisions of these hundreds of small investors rather than the strategic shifts of a few large players.

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 02:02 AM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyPayette (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
Chart Section10 Top Regions
×
Chart Section10 Top Pct
Chart Section10 Top Pct
×
Chart Section11 Buysell
Chart Section11 Buysell
×
Chart Section11 Buysell Price