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

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Wells (IN)
8,256
Total Investors in Wells (IN)
618
Investor Owned SFR in Wells (IN)
764(9.3%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
509
SFR Owned
424
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
109
SFR Owned
344
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 764 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

Small Landlords Dominate Wells County with 71% Ownership, Securing 55% Discounts as Institutions Remain Sidelined
Investors own 764 SFR properties in Wells County, representing 9.3% of the market. Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control a commanding 70.8% of this portfolio, dwarfing the 0.4% held by institutional investors. In Q4, landlords were aggressive net buyers, acquiring 15.7% of all homes sold at a remarkable 55.2% average discount compared to traditional homeowners, while institutional players were neutral or net sellers.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 764 SFR properties in Wells County, with individuals holding 55.5% of the portfolio.
Cash is the dominant financing method, with 666 properties owned outright versus only 98 financed properties. Individuals constitute the vast majority of landlords by entity count, with 509 individual investors compared to 109 companies. The portfolio is heavily rental-focused, with 714 properties classified as rented.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
Landlords in Q4 secured a massive 55.2% discount, paying $132,092 while homeowners paid $295,116.
This $163,024 average discount in Q4 is consistent with a strong landlord pricing advantage seen throughout the year. However, Q1 2025 data shows a significant anomaly where landlords paid a 191.6% premium, likely due to a single, high-value, non-traditional SFR purchase that skewed the average.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords acquired 15.7% of all SFR properties sold in Wells County during Q4 2025.
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) drove this activity, accounting for 62.5% of all investor purchases (10 properties). In contrast, institutional investors (1000+ properties) made up just 6.2% of investor buying activity, acquiring a single property.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control 70.8% of investor-owned SFR housing in Wells County.
This small investor dominance starkly contrasts with institutional investors (1000+ properties), who own a mere 0.4% of the investor-held portfolio. Single-property landlords alone make up the largest segment, owning 45.0% of all investor properties.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Companies become the majority property owners at the 6-10 property tier, holding 60.5% of assets in that segment.
This crossover point highlights a clear business strategy, as individuals dominate smaller portfolios with 87.6% ownership in the single-property tier. The shift to corporate structures occurs as portfolios scale, signaling a move towards more formalized business operations.
Geographic Distribution
Investor activity in Wells County is hyper-concentrated, with 70.8% of all investor-owned properties located in a single zip code: 46714.
While zip code 46714 has the highest count of investor properties at 541, other areas show higher saturation. The highest investor ownership rates are found in zip codes 46991 (25.0%) and 46778 (19.2%), indicating specific neighborhoods with intense investor focus.
Historical Transactions
Landlords in Wells County are aggressive net buyers, acquiring 20 properties while selling only 2 in Q4 2025.
This 10-to-1 buy-to-sell ratio signals strong confidence in the local market. In contrast, institutional investors (1000+ tier) were inactive as net sellers or neutral parties, buying 3 properties and selling 3 over the course of 2024.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlords were involved in 13.0% of all Q4 2025 transactions in Wells County, totaling 20 transactions.
A significant price gap exists between investor tiers, with institutional buyers paying 32.1% less than new single-property landlords ($102,930 vs $151,620). Only the two-property tier showed inter-landlord activity, acquiring 100% of their properties from other landlords.

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 764 SFR properties in Wells County, with individuals holding 55.5% of the portfolio.
Detailed Findings

In Wells County, investors hold a total of 764 Single-Family Residential (SFR) properties, accounting for 9.3% of the total 8,256 SFRs in the market.

Individual investors form the backbone of the rental market, owning 424 properties (55.5%), while company investors hold the remaining 344 properties (45.0%). This near-even split is more company-heavy than national averages.

By entity, the market is overwhelmingly composed of small investors, with 509 distinct individual landlords compared to just 109 company landlords, a ratio of nearly 5 to 1.

Cash is the preferred acquisition method by a wide margin. A striking 87.2% of the investor-owned portfolio (666 properties) is owned free and clear, compared to just 98 properties that carry financing.

The portfolio is clearly geared towards generating rental income, with 714 of the 764 properties identified as rented, underscoring the primary business focus of property owners in the county.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
Landlords in Q4 secured a massive 55.2% discount, paying $132,092 while homeowners paid $295,116.
Detailed Findings

Investors in Wells County demonstrated significant purchasing power in Q4 2025, acquiring properties for an average price of $132,092. This represents a staggering 55.2% discount compared to the $295,116 average paid by traditional homeowners, saving investors an average of $163,024 per property.

This trend of deep discounts was consistent for most of the year, with landlords also securing a 55.5% discount in Q3 and a 39.9% discount in Q2, indicating a sustained ability to find undervalued properties.

An extreme outlier occurred in Q1 2025, where the average landlord acquisition price spiked to $795,814, a 191.6% premium over the homeowner price of $272,948. This anomaly suggests the purchase of a high-value or atypical property by an investor, which skewed the quarterly average.

Comparing recent periods, the average landlord acquisition price has fluctuated, but the pandemic-era (2020-2023) average of $143,578 suggests that recent quarterly prices, excluding the Q1 outlier, are within historical norms for the area.

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 15.7% of all SFR properties sold in Wells County during Q4 2025.
Detailed Findings

Investor activity accounted for 15.7% of the Wells County housing market in Q4 2025, with landlords purchasing 16 of the 102 total SFRs sold.

The bulk of purchasing power came from small-scale investors. Mom-and-pop landlords (owning 1-10 properties) were responsible for 62.5% of all investor acquisitions, purchasing 10 properties in the quarter.

New entrants are a key part of the market, with 5 new single-property landlord entities acquiring 4 properties, signaling fresh capital and new participants in the local rental scene.

Mid-size investors (11-50 properties) also showed notable activity, purchasing 5 properties and accounting for 31.3% of the landlord total for the quarter.

Institutional investors with portfolios of over 1,000 properties had a minimal impact, purchasing just a single property. This represents only 6.2% of investor acquisitions and less than 1% of total market sales, challenging the narrative of large-scale corporate takeovers in this market.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control 70.8% of investor-owned SFR housing in Wells County.
Detailed Findings

The investor landscape in Wells County is overwhelmingly dominated by small-scale operators. Mom-and-pop landlords, who own between 1 and 10 properties, collectively control 70.8% of all investor-owned SFRs.

First-time or single-investment landlords are the most significant market force, with the single-property tier alone accounting for 350 properties, or 45.0% of the entire investor portfolio.

In stark contrast, institutional investors (1,000+ properties) have a negligible footprint, owning just 3 properties in the county, which translates to only 0.4% of the investor-owned market share.

Mid-to-large landlords also represent a smaller but notable segment. Investors owning 11-100 properties hold 12.8% of the portfolio, while those with 101-1,000 properties control a more substantial 16.1% share, indicating a few larger regional players exist.

This distribution reveals a highly fragmented market, heavily reliant on local, small-scale investors rather than large, consolidated corporate 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 property owners at the 6-10 property tier, holding 60.5% of assets in that segment.
Detailed Findings

While individual investors own the majority of properties overall (55.5%), corporate ownership becomes dominant as portfolio sizes increase. The clear crossover point is the 6-10 property tier, where companies own 23 properties (60.5%) compared to the 15 owned by individuals.

Individual landlords are the definitive force in smaller portfolios. They own 310 of the single-property holdings (87.6%) and 31 of the two-property holdings (77.5%), demonstrating their role as the primary entry point into real estate investment.

In the 3-5 property tier, ownership is still majority-individual at 65.0%, but the 35.0% company share shows a growing formalization as investors begin to expand their holdings.

This pattern suggests a typical investor lifecycle in Wells County: individuals start with one or two properties under their own name and then transition to a corporate structure like an LLC for liability and operational purposes once their portfolio reaches a certain scale, typically around 6 properties.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor activity in Wells County is hyper-concentrated, with 70.8% of all investor-owned properties located in a single zip code: 46714.
Detailed Findings

The vast majority of real estate investor activity in Wells County is concentrated in the 46714 zip code, which contains 541 investor-owned properties. This single area accounts for 70.8% of the entire investor portfolio in the county.

While 46714 dominates by volume, its investor ownership rate of 12.3% is not the highest in the county. This indicates it is a large area with significant housing stock, attracting the most total investors.

Smaller, more saturated markets exist elsewhere. Zip code 46991 has the highest rate of investor ownership at 25.0%, meaning one in every four SFRs is investor-owned. Similarly, zip code 46778 has a high penetration rate of 19.2%.

This data reveals two distinct geographic patterns: a primary concentration of investor properties by sheer volume in one main area (46714), and smaller, secondary pockets of high-density investment where landlords own a much larger percentage of the local housing.

The remaining investor properties are spread thinly across other zip codes, such as 46777 (81 properties, 4.3% rate) and 46791 (28 properties, 10.3% rate), which have far less concentration.

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 in Wells County are aggressive net buyers, acquiring 20 properties while selling only 2 in Q4 2025.
Detailed Findings

Investors in Wells County are in a strong accumulation phase, consistently buying more properties than they sell. In Q4 2025, they were aggressive net buyers with 20 purchases versus only 2 sales, a ratio of 10 to 1.

This net-buyer trend has been consistent over the past two years. In 2025, landlords acquired 67 properties and sold 29, and in 2024, they purchased 85 while selling 54, demonstrating sustained portfolio growth.

A significant divergence in strategy appears when comparing the overall market to institutional players. While all landlords are expanding, institutional investors (1,000+ tier) demonstrated a neutral position in 2024, with an equal number of buys (3) and sells (3).

This suggests that market growth is being fueled entirely by small and mid-sized local investors, while the largest national players are either holding steady or potentially divesting in this specific market.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
Landlords were involved in 13.0% of all Q4 2025 transactions in Wells County, totaling 20 transactions.
Detailed Findings

In Q4 2025, landlords participated in 20 of the 154 total SFR transactions in Wells County, capturing a 13.0% share of market activity.

Mom-and-pop investors (Tiers 01-04) drove the majority of this volume, conducting 14 of the 20 landlord transactions. This aligns with their dominant position in overall market ownership.

A clear pricing advantage emerges for larger, more experienced buyers. The institutional investor (1000+ tier) paid an average of $102,930 for its acquisition, a 32.1% discount compared to the $151,620 average paid by new, single-property landlords.

Inter-landlord trading was minimal but concentrated. The vast majority of investors purchased from traditional homeowners, with 0% of transactions being landlord-to-landlord in most tiers. The sole exception was the two-property tier, where 100% of its 2 purchases came from existing landlords, suggesting consolidation or portfolio sales within that specific segment.

This data highlights sophisticated pricing strategies by larger players and an acquisition market that primarily involves investors buying from the general public, not from each other.

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 Investors Dominate Wells County with 71% of Holdings, Acquiring Properties at 55% Below Market Rates
Holdings
In Wells County, landlords own 764 SFR properties, representing 9.3% of the total market. The portfolio is primarily held by individual investors, who own 424 properties (55.5%), while companies own the remaining 344 properties (45.0%).
Pricing
Landlords demonstrated significant purchasing power in Q4, paying an average of $132,092, which is 55.2% less than the $295,116 paid by traditional homeowners—a striking discount of $163,024 per property.
Activity
Investors were active in Q4, purchasing 16 properties for a 15.7% share of all market sales. This activity included the emergence of 5 new single-property landlord entities, signaling continued growth from small-scale investors.
Market Share
The investor market is controlled by small operators, as mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) own a commanding 70.8% of all investor-held housing. In contrast, institutional investors (1,000+ properties) have a negligible footprint at just 0.4%.
Ownership Type
Individual investors are the primary force in small portfolios, but companies become the majority owners once a portfolio scales to the 6-10 property tier, where they control 60.5% of the assets.
Transactions
Landlords are firmly in an accumulation phase, acting as strong net buyers with a 10-to-1 buy/sell ratio in Q4 (20 buys vs 2 sells). Conversely, institutional investors have been neutral, with an equal number of buys and sells in 2024.
Market Narrative

The real estate investor market in Wells County, Indiana, is fundamentally a story of local, small-scale enterprise. Investors own 764 single-family properties, comprising 9.3% of the county's total SFR housing stock. This portfolio is dominated by mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who control a commanding 70.8% of all investor-owned homes. Ownership is split between individuals (55.5%) and companies (45.0%), with individuals forming the vast majority of new entrants, while corporate structures become prevalent for portfolios larger than six properties. In stark contrast, institutional investors with 1,000+ properties have a nearly invisible presence, owning just 0.4% of the market.

Investor behavior in Wells County is characterized by aggressive acquisition and savvy pricing. In Q4 2025, landlords purchased 15.7% of all homes sold and demonstrated a remarkable ability to secure deals, paying an average of 55.2% less than traditional homeowners. This translated to a $163,024 discount per property. The market is in a clear growth phase, with investors acting as strong net buyers with a 10-to-1 buy-to-sell ratio in the last quarter. This expansion is driven by small and mid-sized players, as the minimal institutional presence has been neutral or divesting, signaling their focus is elsewhere.

The key takeaway for the Wells County housing market is that it remains driven by local entrepreneurs, not large corporations. The market structure, with its high concentration of small landlords, suggests a fragmented and competitive environment for rental properties. The significant pricing discounts achieved by investors indicate a market with opportunities for value-based purchasing. The hyper-concentration of investor properties in specific zip codes like 46714 points to targeted strategies, creating localized zones of high rental density. This dynamic—of growing, local-level investment—defines the current and near-future landscape of the county's rental market.

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 16, 2026 at 09:21 AM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyWells (IN)
×
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 Section11 Yoy All Landlords
Chart Section11 Yoy All Landlords
×
Chart Section11 Institutional
Chart Section11 Institutional
×
Chart Section11 Institutional Price
Chart Section11 Institutional Price
×
Chart Section12 Transactions
Chart Section12 Transactions
×
Chart Section12 Prices
Chart Section12 Prices
×
Chart Section12 Prices Detail
Chart Section12 Prices Detail