Union (IN) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

In Union County, investors hold a significant 21.2% of the single-family residential market, totaling 424 properties.

Individual investors overwhelmingly dominate the landscape, owning 375 properties (88.4%), while companies hold just 50 properties (11.8%). This pattern extends to the number of landlords, with 479 individuals compared to only 40 companies.

Cash is the primary acquisition method, with 411 properties (97.0%) owned outright, compared to a mere 13 properties (3.0%) that are financed. This indicates a market with low leverage and high equity among investors.

The portfolio is almost entirely dedicated to rentals, with 416 of the 424 properties classified as non-owner-occupied. This highlights a clear strategy focused on generating rental income rather than short-term flipping or personal use.

The high ratio of individual landlords to properties they own underscores the 'mom-and-pop' nature of the market, where the average investor is a small-scale operator rather than a large corporation.

Due to a complete lack of landlord purchase activity in Q4 2025, no data is available to compare acquisition prices between investors and traditional homeowners for the current quarter.

Similarly, the absence of transactions in recent quarters prevents the analysis of any price appreciation or depreciation trends in Union County for investor-acquired properties.

Historical data from 2020-2023 indicates an average acquisition price of $123,998 for landlords, providing a baseline for future comparisons should market activity resume.

Without recent comparable sales for both landlords and homeowners, it is not possible to determine if investors are securing properties at a discount in the current market environment.

The lack of purchasing from any investor segment suggests market conditions, such as high interest rates, low inventory, or pricing, may be prohibitive for new acquisitions.

Q4 2025 was marked by a total lack of acquisition activity in Union County's SFR market, with landlords making zero purchases out of zero total sales.

This market freeze affected all investor types, from first-time buyers to large-scale operators. No new single-property landlords (Tier 01) entered the market, indicating a barrier to entry or lack of attractive opportunities.

Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who constitute the vast majority of owners in the county, made no new acquisitions, halting any portfolio growth during the quarter.

Institutional investors (1000+ properties), who already have no presence in the county, also recorded zero purchases, reinforcing the area's lack of appeal for large-scale capital.

The complete absence of sales signals a significant market stall, potentially driven by a lack of available inventory, pricing disagreements between buyers and sellers, or broader economic factors impacting the region.

The investor market in Union County is unequivocally dominated by small-scale landlords, with those owning 1-10 properties (Tiers 01-04) controlling a massive 99.3% of all investor-held SFRs.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) form the bedrock of the market, owning 337 properties, which translates to 77.6% of the entire investor portfolio. This highlights the hyper-local, small-scale nature of rental ownership in the area.

In stark contrast, institutional-grade investors (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) have absolutely no footprint in Union County, with 0.0% ownership. This market is not on the radar for large corporate landlords.

Mid-size landlords are also exceedingly rare, with only three properties held by investors in the 11-100 property range. This demonstrates a clear market structure composed almost entirely of the smallest investors.

The ownership distribution firmly refutes any narrative of corporate takeover in this market; it is fundamentally a community of small, local investors.

While individual investors dominate the overall market, a clear strategic shift occurs as portfolios grow. Companies become the majority owner in the 6-10 property tier, holding 8 of the 9 properties (88.9%).

This crossover point indicates that as local investors scale their operations beyond five properties, they are highly likely to incorporate for liability or financial reasons.

In the smallest tiers, individual ownership is near-total. Individuals own 307 of 337 single-property landlord portfolios (90.8%) and 45 of 48 two-property portfolios (93.8%).

Even in the 3-5 property tier, individuals maintain strong control, owning 32 of 37 properties (86.5%).

This data reveals a distinct lifecycle for investors in Union County: they begin as individuals and transition to a corporate structure upon reaching a modest scale of 6-10 properties.

Investor ownership in Union County is not evenly distributed but is instead intensely focused in specific zip codes. The 47003 area stands out with a 49.0% investor ownership rate, meaning nearly one in every two SFR properties is investor-owned.

This pattern of high concentration is also evident in other parts of the county, including 47331 (48.3% rate) and 47325 (39.9% rate), indicating targeted investment in certain communities.

While some areas have high penetration rates, the largest volume of investor properties is in zip code 47353, which contains 223 investor-owned SFRs, albeit at a lower rate of 14.5%.

The data highlights a clear distinction between regions with the highest count of investor properties and those with the highest percentage. This suggests different market dynamics, with some areas being saturated by investors while others simply have a larger housing stock.

This geographic concentration suggests that local market knowledge plays a crucial role for investors, who appear to be targeting very specific neighborhoods or towns within the county.

Based on the most recent full year of data, landlords in Union County were expanding their portfolios, acting as net buyers in 2024. They collectively purchased 7 SFR properties while only selling 4, resulting in a net gain of 3 properties.

This net buyer status in 2024 contrasts sharply with the complete halt in purchasing observed in Q4 2025, suggesting a significant shift in market conditions over the past year.

Institutional investors (1000+ tier) had a minimal and balanced impact, with a single purchase offset by a single sale in 2024. This reinforces their lack of a strategic presence in the county.

Data on the proportion of inter-landlord transactions is unavailable, making it difficult to assess the liquidity and churn within the existing investor community.

The shift from net acquisition in 2024 to zero activity in late 2025 points to a market that has become increasingly challenging for investors to operate in.

The transaction market in Union County was completely dormant in Q4 2025, with landlords participating in zero of the zero total SFR transactions recorded.

This lack of activity was universal across all investor sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04), the dominant owners in the county, recorded no transactions during the period.

Similarly, institutional investors (Tier 09) also logged zero transactions, consistent with their overall lack of presence in the market.

As there were no purchases, the data shows no inter-landlord trading activity. The market for investors selling to other investors was as frozen as the broader market.

The complete absence of transactions among any investor tier suggests that both acquisition and disposition strategies were on hold, pointing to a market in a state of equilibrium or gridlock.