Gallatin (IL) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Gallatin (IL)
2,019
Total Investors in Gallatin (IL)
1,114
Investor Owned SFR in Gallatin (IL)
883(43.7%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
1,093
SFR Owned
862
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
21
SFR Owned
23
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 883 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 Gallatin County with 43.7% Market Share as Investor Activity Halts in Q4
Investors own 883 Single-Family Residential properties in Gallatin County, IL, representing a significant 43.7% of the total market. This ownership is almost entirely controlled by small, individual landlords (97.6% of properties), with mom-and-pop tiers (1-10 properties) accounting for a staggering 99.8% of the investor portfolio. While historically net buyers, the market saw a complete freeze in Q4 2025, with zero recorded landlord purchases or transactions.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 43.7% of Gallatin County SFRs, with individuals holding 97.6% of the portfolio.
The vast majority of investor-owned homes were acquired with cash (785 properties) versus just 98 being financed. Nearly the entire portfolio (872 of 883 properties) is designated for rental purposes. Individual landlords (1,093) vastly outnumber company landlords (21).
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
Landlord pricing in Gallatin County is highly volatile, swinging from a 50.0% discount in Q1 to a 20.6% premium in Q3.
In Q3 2025, the latest active quarter, landlords paid an average of $121,167, which was $20,667 more than traditional homeowners. This is a sharp reversal from Q1, where they paid $45,500 less than homeowners. No landlord purchases were recorded in Q4 2025.
Current Quarter Purchases
Investor purchasing activity came to a complete halt, with landlords acquiring 0% of the 0 homes sold in Q4 2025.
The market inactivity was universal across all investor types, with both mom-and-pop landlords and institutional investors recording zero purchases. This marks a significant pause in a market where investors have historically been active.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) overwhelmingly control 99.8% of Gallatin County's investor-owned housing.
Single-property landlords alone account for 85.7% of all investor-held SFRs, totaling 781 properties. In stark contrast, institutional investors (1,000+ properties) own just one property, representing a minimal 0.1% share of the market.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Individual investors dominate every ownership tier in Gallatin County, with no crossover point for company control.
In the single-property tier, individuals own 98.0% of the homes (767 properties). This pattern continues into larger tiers, with individuals owning 96.7% of two-property portfolios and 100% of portfolios in the 6-10 property range.
Geographic Distribution
Investor ownership is highly concentrated across Gallatin County, with rates exceeding 40% in top zip codes like 62984 and 62979.
Several zip codes exhibit investor ownership rates above 50%, including 62869 (60.0%) and 62867 (51.1%). The zip code 62984 leads in sheer volume with 284 investor-owned properties.
Historical Transactions
Gallatin County landlords have been consistent net buyers historically, with a 2-to-1 buy-to-sell ratio in Q3 2025.
In Q3 2025, landlords purchased 4 properties while selling only 2. This continues a trend from 2024 when they bought 8 properties and sold 2. No institutional transactions were recorded.
Current Quarter Transactions
The transaction market was entirely inactive in Q4 2025, with landlords involved in 0% of the 0 total transactions.
This inactivity spanned all investor tiers, from the smallest mom-and-pop landlords to the largest institutional players. Consequently, there was no inter-landlord trading and no variation in purchase prices, as no deals occurred.

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 43.7% of Gallatin County SFRs, with individuals holding 97.6% of the portfolio.
Detailed Findings

Investors hold a substantial footprint in Gallatin County, controlling 883 of the 2,019 Single-Family Residential properties, a market share of 43.7%.

The investor landscape is overwhelmingly dominated by individuals rather than corporations. Individual landlords own 862 properties, which constitutes 97.6% of the entire investor-owned portfolio, compared to just 23 properties (2.6%) owned by companies.

This individual dominance is also reflected in the entity count, where 1,093 individual landlords operate in the market, far outnumbering the 21 company entities.

Cash is the primary method of acquisition for Gallatin County investors. A total of 785 properties in the portfolio are owned outright without financing, compared to only 98 that carry a mortgage, indicating a well-capitalized investor base.

The portfolio is clearly geared towards generating rental income, with 872 of the 883 properties classified as non-owner-occupied or rented. This high concentration underscores the business focus of property ownership in the region.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
Landlord pricing in Gallatin County is highly volatile, swinging from a 50.0% discount in Q1 to a 20.6% premium in Q3.
Detailed Findings

Due to extremely low transaction volumes, landlord acquisition pricing in Gallatin County shows significant volatility rather than a consistent trend. There were no landlord purchases recorded in the most recent quarter, Q4 2025.

In Q3 2025, landlords paid a notable premium, with an average acquisition price of $121,167 compared to the traditional homeowner average of $100,500. This represents a 20.6% premium, or $20,667 more per property.

This Q3 premium marks a dramatic reversal from earlier in the year. In Q1 2025, landlords secured properties at a steep 50.0% discount, paying just $45,500 on average while homeowners paid $91,000.

Looking at broader timeframes, the average acquisition price for landlords in 2024 was $87,413, which is lower than the average of $99,026 during the 2020-2023 period, suggesting a recent softening in prices paid by investors before activity paused.

The wide pricing swings from a $45,500 discount to a $20,667 premium within a six-month period highlight a market where individual deal characteristics heavily outweigh broader pricing patterns.

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

Key Insight
Investor purchasing activity came to a complete halt, with landlords acquiring 0% of the 0 homes sold in Q4 2025.
Detailed Findings

The investor purchase market in Gallatin County was completely dormant in Q4 2025. Landlords made zero acquisitions, accounting for 0.0% of the quarter's total SFR purchases.

This lack of activity was consistent across all investor sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who form the backbone of the local market, made no new purchases during the quarter.

Similarly, institutional investors (1,000+ properties) were also inactive, recording zero acquisitions in Q4.

The data indicates no new landlords entered the market in Q4, as the single-property tier, a proxy for new entrants, also saw no purchasing activity.

This Q4 freeze represents a stark departure from previous periods and suggests a significant market-wide pause in investor demand or available inventory at the end of 2025.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) overwhelmingly control 99.8% of Gallatin County's investor-owned housing.
Detailed Findings

The investor ownership structure in Gallatin County is almost exclusively composed of small-scale operators. Mom-and-pop landlords, defined as those owning 1-10 properties, control a staggering 99.8% of all investor-owned SFRs.

The market is anchored by the smallest investors. Landlords with just a single property (Tier 01) represent the largest segment by a wide margin, owning 781 properties, which is 85.7% of the entire investor portfolio.

Ownership concentration dissipates quickly in larger tiers. Two-property and small (3-5) landlords each hold 61 properties (6.7% each), while landlords with 6-10 properties own just 6 homes (0.7%).

The presence of large-scale investors is negligible. The institutional tier (1,000+ properties) holds just a single property in the county, accounting for only 0.1% of the investor market share.

This distribution highlights a hyper-localized market driven by small, local investors, challenging any narrative of corporate landlord dominance in this specific geography.

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
Individual investors dominate every ownership tier in Gallatin County, with no crossover point for company control.
Detailed Findings

Individual investors maintain overwhelming control across every portfolio size in Gallatin County, leaving a very small footprint for company-owned properties. There is no tier where companies approach, let alone exceed, individual ownership.

Even at the entry-level, companies are a small minority. Among single-property landlords, individuals own 767 properties (98.0%) while companies own just 16 (2.0%).

This individual dominance persists as portfolio sizes increase. For landlords with two properties, individuals own 59 homes (96.7%) compared to only 2 for companies (3.3%).

In the 3-5 property tier, individuals hold 58 properties (95.1%), while companies own just 3 (4.9%).

The trend is absolute in the 6-10 property tier, where 100% of the 6 properties are owned by individual landlords, with zero company ownership recorded.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor ownership is highly concentrated across Gallatin County, with rates exceeding 40% in top zip codes like 62984 and 62979.
Detailed Findings

Investor activity is a defining characteristic across all of Gallatin County, with certain zip codes showing exceptionally high concentrations of landlord-owned properties.

The zip code 62984 has the highest raw count of investor properties at 284, which translates to a 45.6% investor ownership rate for that area.

Several areas cross the majority-investor threshold. The zip code 62869 has the highest penetration rate, where investors own 60.0% of the SFR housing stock, followed closely by 62867 at 51.1%.

High volume and high rates often coincide. The region of 62934 not only has a high count of 148 investor properties but also one of the highest ownership rates at 47.9%.

Other significant areas of concentration include 62979, with 211 investor-owned homes (42.5% rate), and 62867, with 94 properties (51.1% rate), underscoring the deep integration of investors into the local housing market.

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
Gallatin County landlords have been consistent net buyers historically, with a 2-to-1 buy-to-sell ratio in Q3 2025.
Detailed Findings

Despite the recent Q4 freeze, historical data shows that landlords in Gallatin County have been consistently expanding their portfolios by acquiring more properties than they sell.

In the most recent active quarter, Q3 2025, landlords were net buyers, purchasing 4 SFR properties while only selling 2, resulting in a net gain of 2 properties.

This pattern of accumulation holds true for the full year of 2025, where landlords acquired 5 properties and sold 3, again demonstrating a net positive position.

The trend was even more pronounced in 2024. During that year, investors added significantly to their holdings, buying 8 properties and selling only 2, a buy-to-sell ratio of 4-to-1.

Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) have been completely absent from the transaction market, with no recorded buy or sell activity in the provided timeframes.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
The transaction market was entirely inactive in Q4 2025, with landlords involved in 0% of the 0 total transactions.
Detailed Findings

Q4 2025 was marked by a complete absence of transaction activity in Gallatin County's SFR market. There were zero total transactions, meaning landlords had a 0.0% share of a non-existent market.

The market shutdown affected investors of all sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04), who dominate ownership, did not participate in any transactions during the quarter.

Likewise, institutional investors (Tier 09) were also on the sidelines, with zero recorded transactions in Q4.

As a result of the inactivity, there was no trading between landlords. The percentage of properties bought from other landlords was zero, indicating a complete lack of liquidity within the investor community.

No purchase price data is available for Q4 by tier, as the lack of transactions means no pricing benchmarks were set during this period of market dormancy.

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

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Executive Summary

Individual Mom-and-Pop Investors Own 43.7% of Gallatin County's Housing, as Market Activity Froze in Q4 2025
Holdings
Landlords own 883 SFR properties in Gallatin County, IL, a significant 43.7% of the market. The portfolio is overwhelmingly held by individual investors, who own 862 of these properties (97.6%), compared to just 23 (2.6%) owned by companies.
Pricing
Landlord pricing is highly volatile due to low sales volume; in Q3 2025, the latest active quarter, they paid a 20.6% premium over homeowners ($121,167 vs $100,500). There were no landlord purchases in Q4 2025 to establish a current price comparison.
Activity
Investor purchase activity came to a complete standstill in Q4 2025, with landlords responsible for 0 of the 0 total SFR purchases. Consequently, no new landlords entered the market during this period of inactivity.
Market Share
Small-scale landlords (1-10 properties) dominate the market, controlling 99.8% of all investor-owned housing. In contrast, institutional investors (1,000+ properties) have a negligible presence, owning just 0.1% of the portfolio.
Ownership Type
Individual investors are the dominant force across all portfolio sizes in Gallatin County. Unlike other markets, there is no crossover tier where companies become the majority owners.
Transactions
While historically net buyers (acquiring 5 properties and selling 3 in 2025), landlords recorded zero transactions in Q4 2025. Institutional investors have been completely inactive in the transaction market.
Market Narrative

The single-family residential market in Gallatin County, IL is uniquely characterized by the deep penetration of small, individual investors. Landlords own a substantial 883 properties, representing 43.7% of the entire SFR housing stock. This market is not driven by corporations; individual investors own 97.6% of this portfolio (862 properties). The ownership structure is granular, with mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) controlling a near-total 99.8% of investor housing, while institutional firms have a functionally non-existent share of 0.1%.

Investor behavior in Gallatin County reflects a pattern of gradual accumulation, with landlords acting as consistent net buyers in recent years. However, this momentum came to an abrupt halt in Q4 2025, a quarter marked by zero landlord purchases or transactions, signaling a market-wide pause. Pricing data, constrained by low volume, is volatile and lacks a clear trend, with landlords paying a significant premium in one quarter and securing a large discount in another. This suggests that individual deal-making, rather than broad market forces, dictates pricing for investors.

The key takeaway for the Gallatin County housing market is its operation as a closed-loop system dominated by a large base of local, individual investors. The high ownership rates, exceeding 50% in some zip codes, indicate that rental housing is a fundamental component of the community's structure. The complete stop in Q4 activity is the most critical recent development, suggesting that factors such as interest rates, local economic shifts, or a lack of desirable inventory have temporarily frozen this highly localized investment landscape.

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 02:26 AM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyGallatin (IL)
×
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 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