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

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Hardin (IL)
1,150
Total Investors in Hardin (IL)
819
Investor Owned SFR in Hardin (IL)
661(57.5%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
786
SFR Owned
639
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
33
SFR Owned
42
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 661 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

Hardin County, IL: A Market Defined by Mom-and-Pop Investors with a 57.5% Ownership Share and Low Liquidity
Investors own a staggering 57.5% of all Single-Family Residential properties in Hardin County, IL, a market almost entirely controlled by small, individual landlords who hold 96.7% of the portfolio. In a market with very low transaction volume, these investors demonstrate significant pricing power, securing discounts over 50% compared to traditional homeowners in recent quarters. Activity is driven exclusively by mom-and-pop investors, who were strong net buyers in 2024, while institutional firms have zero presence.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 661 SFRs, a 57.5% market share, with individuals holding 96.7% of properties.
The vast majority of investor properties (626 of 661) are owned outright with cash, while only 35 are financed. There are 819 distinct landlords in the county, of which 786 are individuals.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
Landlords secured a massive 55.3% discount compared to homeowners in Q3 2025.
In Q3 2025, landlords paid an average of $78,220 while homeowners paid $175,000, a stark difference of $96,780. The discount was also significant in Q2 at 47.6% ($78,000). Q4 2025 data was inconclusive due to no traditional homeowner sales.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords captured 100% of the single SFR purchase in Hardin County in Q4 2025.
The lone purchase was made by a mom-and-pop investor entering the market with their first property. Institutional investors (Tier 09) had zero purchasing activity, continuing their absence from the market.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control an overwhelming 98.4% of investor-owned SFRs.
Single-property landlords are the bedrock of the market, owning 552 properties, which constitutes 80.0% of all investor housing. Institutional investors (1000+ properties) have absolutely no presence in the county.
Ownership by Tier & Type
While individuals own 96.7% of properties, companies control 80% of the small 6-10 property tier.
The crossover point where companies become the majority owner occurs in the 6-10 property tier. However, this is based on a very small sample of just 5 total properties in that tier (4 company vs 1 individual).
Geographic Distribution
Investor ownership is hyper-concentrated, with the 62982 zip code reaching an 80.8% rate.
The top three zip codes by investor-owned property count—62982, 62931, and 62919—are also the top three by ownership rate, with all exceeding 45%. This indicates deep investor saturation in specific communities.
Historical Transactions
In 2024, landlords were aggressive net buyers, acquiring 17 properties while only selling one.
The 17-to-1 buy-to-sell ratio in 2024 demonstrates a clear accumulation strategy among the county's small investors. In contrast, institutional investors recorded zero transactions, highlighting their complete absence from the market.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlords accounted for 100% of the single SFR transaction in Hardin County in Q4 2025.
The transaction was executed by a single-property landlord at a price of $100,000. This purchase was not from another landlord, indicating an acquisition from the traditional market. There were no institutional transactions.

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 661 SFRs, a 57.5% market share, with individuals holding 96.7% of properties.
Detailed Findings

Investor ownership in Hardin County is exceptionally high, with landlords holding 661 of the 1,150 available SFR properties, representing a 57.5% market penetration rate.

The market is overwhelmingly dominated by individual, or 'mom-and-pop', investors who own 639 properties, accounting for 96.7% of the entire investor-owned portfolio. Company-owned properties are a small fraction, with just 42 properties (6.4%).

This individual dominance is also reflected in the landlord entity count, where 786 of the 819 total landlords (96.0%) are individuals, compared to just 33 companies.

Financial strategies lean heavily towards long-term, stable ownership, as evidenced by the 626 properties (94.7%) owned with cash versus only 35 properties (5.3%) that are financed.

The portfolio is clearly rental-focused, with 657 of the 661 properties classified as non-owner-occupied or rented, underscoring the role of investors as the primary source of rental housing in the county.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
Landlords secured a massive 55.3% discount compared to homeowners in Q3 2025.
Detailed Findings

Investors in Hardin County demonstrate exceptional purchasing power, consistently acquiring properties at a significant discount compared to traditional homeowners.

In Q3 2025, landlords paid an average of $78,220, which was 55.3% less than the $175,000 paid by homeowners—a staggering $96,780 price advantage on the typical purchase.

This trend was not an anomaly, as a similar pattern appeared in Q2 2025 when landlords paid $86,000 against the homeowner price of $164,000, representing a 47.6% discount ($78,000).

While landlords made one purchase in Q4 2025 for $100,000, a direct comparison is not possible as there were no recorded sales to traditional homeowners in the same period.

Historical data shows a gradual price appreciation from the 2020-2023 average of $89,032 to the 2024 average of $113,140, though transaction volumes remain low.

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 100% of the single SFR purchase in Hardin County in Q4 2025.
Detailed Findings

Market activity in Q4 2025 was extremely limited, with only a single SFR property purchase recorded in the entire county.

Landlords accounted for 100% of this activity, acquiring the one property sold. This single transaction underscores the very low liquidity in the Hardin County housing market.

The purchase was made by a new, single-property landlord (Tier 01), reinforcing the market's reliance on new mom-and-pop investors for any new activity. This tier represented 100% of all landlord purchases in the quarter.

In stark contrast, mid-size landlords and large institutional investors (Tier 09) were completely inactive, making zero purchases during the quarter.

This Q4 activity, though minimal, confirms that the market's growth, however small, is driven exclusively by the smallest-scale investors.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control an overwhelming 98.4% of investor-owned SFRs.
Detailed Findings

The investor landscape in Hardin County is the epitome of a mom-and-pop dominated market, with 98.4% of all investor-owned properties held by landlords with portfolios of 10 or fewer homes.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) represent the largest segment by a wide margin, owning 552 properties. This single tier accounts for 80.0% of the entire investor-owned SFR stock.

The next largest tiers are also small-scale, with two-property landlords holding 71 properties (10.3%) and those with 3-5 properties holding 51 (7.4%).

As portfolio sizes increase, the number of properties drops dramatically, with only a handful of properties in the mid-size tiers (11-100 properties).

Confirming the absence of large-scale corporate ownership, institutional investors (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) own zero properties in Hardin County.

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
While individuals own 96.7% of properties, companies control 80% of the small 6-10 property tier.
Detailed Findings

Individual investors are the dominant force across nearly every portfolio size in Hardin County, owning 95.7% of single-property portfolios and 94.4% of two-property portfolios.

A notable statistical crossover occurs in the 6-10 property tier, where companies own 4 of the 5 properties (80.0%), making it the only tier with a majority-company ownership.

It is important to contextualize this crossover, as it is based on an extremely small sample size and does not reflect a broader trend of corporate control in the market.

Even in the small-to-mid-size tiers, individual ownership remains strong, with individuals owning 100% of properties in the 11-20 tier and 75% in the 21-50 tier.

Overall, the data overwhelmingly shows a market built and sustained by individual investors, with corporate entities playing a very minor and niche role.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor ownership is hyper-concentrated, with the 62982 zip code reaching an 80.8% rate.
Detailed Findings

Investor activity in Hardin County is not evenly distributed but is instead highly concentrated in a few key areas. The zip code 62982 stands out as an investor stronghold, with 291 landlord-owned properties, representing an extraordinary 80.8% ownership rate.

The pattern of high concentration continues in other parts of the county. In zip code 62931, investors own 190 properties for a 52.2% share, and in 62919, they own 138 properties, a 45.2% share.

Unlike in larger markets, the areas with the highest count of investor properties are also the areas with the highest penetration rate, signaling deep saturation rather than broad expansion.

The top 5 zip codes all have investor ownership rates above 31%, indicating that in the most active parts of the county, landlords are the dominant market participants.

This geographic clustering suggests that investor activity is focused on specific communities, where they constitute the majority of the 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
Key Insight
In 2024, landlords were aggressive net buyers, acquiring 17 properties while only selling one.
Detailed Findings

Historical transaction data from 2024 reveals a strong bullish sentiment among Hardin County's landlords, who acted as decisive net buyers.

Throughout 2024, investors collectively purchased 17 SFR properties while selling only one, resulting in a net gain of 16 properties to their portfolios.

This 17-to-1 buy/sell ratio signals a confident strategy of accumulation, with investors clearly choosing to expand their holdings rather than divest.

This activity was driven entirely by the existing mom-and-pop investor base, as large institutional investors (1000+ tier) had no transaction activity—buying or selling—during this period.

The data from 2024 paints a picture of a market where local, small-scale investors are actively and confidently growing their footprint.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
Landlords accounted for 100% of the single SFR transaction in Hardin County in Q4 2025.
Detailed Findings

In Q4 2025, landlords were the only active buyers in the Hardin County SFR market, participating in 100% of all transactions.

The market's low liquidity was evident, with only one transaction recorded for the entire quarter. This sole transaction was conducted by an investor in the smallest tier, the single-property landlord group.

The purchase price for this transaction was $100,000, which falls in line with historical pricing for smaller investors in the area.

Notably, 0% of landlord purchases in Q4 came from other landlords, suggesting that the acquisition came from a traditional homeowner or new construction, rather than an investor-to-investor trade.

As with all other activity metrics, institutional investors (Tier 09) were completely absent from the transaction market, recording zero buys or sells.

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

Hardin County, IL: A Market Dominated by Mom-and-Pop Investors with a 57.5% Ownership Share
Holdings
Landlords own 661 SFR properties, a massive 57.5% of the market in Hardin County, IL. Individual investors hold a near-total share with 639 properties (96.7%) compared to just 42 (6.4%) for companies.
Pricing
Landlords demonstrated significant purchasing power, paying 55.3% less than homeowners in Q3 2025 with an average discount of $96,780 per property ($78,220 vs $175,000).
Activity
In a very low-activity Q4 2025, landlords comprised 100% of all SFR purchases, with a single new mom-and-pop investor entering the market.
Market Share
Small landlords (1-10 properties) overwhelmingly control the market with 98.4% of all investor housing, while institutional investors have no presence.
Ownership Type
Individual investors dominate nearly every portfolio size, though companies hold a statistical majority (80.0%) in the very small 6-10 property tier.
Transactions
Landlords were strong net buyers in 2024 with a 17-to-1 buy/sell ratio, signaling confident accumulation in a market with no institutional activity.
Market Narrative

The single-family residential market in Hardin County, IL is fundamentally shaped by investors, who own a staggering 661 properties, representing 57.5% of the entire market. This landscape is the antithesis of a corporate-led housing market; it is overwhelmingly controlled by 786 individual 'mom-and-pop' landlords who hold 96.7% of all investor-owned homes. The market structure is heavily skewed towards the smallest players, with those owning 1-10 properties controlling 98.4% of the rental housing stock, while large-scale institutional investors have zero presence.

Investor behavior in this low-liquidity market is characterized by strategic acquisition and long-term holds, evidenced by the fact that 95% of holdings are owned with cash. In Q4 2025, landlords were responsible for 100% of the single recorded purchase, which was made by a new, first-time investor. This activity follows a year of confident accumulation in 2024, where landlords were strong net buyers with a 17-to-1 buy/sell ratio. When they do buy, investors command significant pricing power, securing discounts of over 50% compared to traditional homeowners.

The key takeaway from Hardin County is a portrait of a stable, investor-saturated rural market where local, small-scale landlords are not just participants—they are the primary providers of housing. With extremely high ownership rates in specific zip codes like 62982 (80.8%), the market dynamics are dictated by the buy-and-hold strategies of individuals, not the high-velocity trading of institutions. This creates a market with low turnover but a deeply embedded investor base that continues to slowly accumulate properties at a significant price advantage.

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 02:28 AM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyHardin (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 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 Section12 Transactions
Chart Section12 Transactions
×
Chart Section12 Prices
Chart Section12 Prices
×
Chart Section12 Prices Detail
Chart Section12 Prices Detail