Chautauqua (KS) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Chautauqua (KS)
1,114
Total Investors in Chautauqua (KS)
672
Investor Owned SFR in Chautauqua (KS)
561(50.4%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
620
SFR Owned
484
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
52
SFR Owned
82
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 561 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

Chautauqua County's Stagnant Market: Investors Hold Over 50% of Homes Amid Zero Q4 Sales Activity
Investors own 50.4% of all single-family residential properties in Chautauqua County, with small 'mom-and-pop' landlords controlling a staggering 94.6% of that portfolio. Despite this high concentration, the market saw zero purchase or sale transactions in Q4 2025, signaling a period of extreme illiquidity and a static, hold-focused investor strategy.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 561 SFR properties, 50.4% of the market, with individuals holding 86.3%.
The entire investor portfolio of 561 properties was acquired with cash, as there are zero financed properties. Of these, 555 properties are confirmed rentals, indicating a strong 98.9% focus on rental income generation.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
No Q4 2025 market activity occurred, preventing any price comparison between landlords and homeowners.
The absence of transactions in Q4 2025 makes it impossible to analyze pricing trends or calculate the typical landlord discount. Historical data from 2020-2023 also shows zero recorded property purchases, indicating a prolonged period of low liquidity.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords captured 0.0% of the Q4 2025 purchase market, as zero SFR properties were sold.
The complete halt in market activity meant no new 'mom-and-pop' landlords (Tiers 01-04) entered the market. Similarly, institutional investors (Tier 09) recorded zero purchases, reflecting the universal lack of transactions.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control a commanding 94.6% of investor-owned homes.
Single-property landlords alone account for 71.6% of all investor-owned housing, with 410 properties. Institutional investors (1000+ properties) have zero presence, holding 0.0% of the market.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Companies become the majority owner in the 11-20 property tier, controlling 60.7% of its properties.
Despite the corporate crossover in the mid-size tier, individuals overwhelmingly dominate smaller portfolios, owning 91.5% of single-property holdings. No recent price data is available to compare buying patterns between owner types.
Geographic Distribution
The 67361 zip code is the epicenter of investor activity, holding 267 properties.
While 67361 has the highest count, smaller zip codes show extreme investor saturation, with 67346 at 100.0% and 67334 at 82.4% investor-owned. This highlights pockets of intense rental concentration.
Historical Transactions
No historical transaction data is available, preventing analysis of landlord buying and selling patterns.
The absence of buy/sell transaction data means it is impossible to determine if landlords are net buyers or sellers. Likewise, landlord-to-landlord transaction rates and implied profit margins cannot be calculated.
Current Quarter Transactions
The landlord share of Q4 2025 transactions was 0.0%, reflecting a market with no sales activity.
With zero transactions, there was no buying activity across any investor tier, from mom-and-pops to larger players. Consequently, no inter-landlord trading occurred, and no pricing data is available for the quarter.

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 561 SFR properties, 50.4% of the market, with individuals holding 86.3%.
Detailed Findings

Investor ownership has reached a majority in Chautauqua County, with 561 of the 1,114 total SFR properties held by landlords, representing a 50.4% market penetration.

The investor landscape is overwhelmingly dominated by individuals rather than corporations. Individual landlords own 484 properties (86.3% of the investor portfolio), while companies own just 82 properties (14.6%).

A defining characteristic of this market is the complete absence of financing in investor portfolios. All 561 investor-owned properties are held as cash assets, suggesting a market of debt-free, long-term holders rather than leveraged speculators.

The primary strategy for investors is clearly rental income, with 555 of the 561 properties classified as rented. This 98.9% rental rate underscores the market's function as a source of housing for tenants, supplied by a large base of individual landlords.

The entity-to-property ratio reveals a highly fragmented market. With 672 distinct landlords owning 561 properties, the data indicates a significant number of co-ownership situations and a very low average portfolio size, reinforcing the 'mom-and-pop' character of the county's investor base.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
No Q4 2025 market activity occurred, preventing any price comparison between landlords and homeowners.
Detailed Findings

The real estate market in Chautauqua County was completely inactive in Q4 2025, with zero recorded purchases by landlords or traditional homeowners. This lack of activity prevents any direct price comparison for the quarter.

Without recent sales, it is impossible to determine if a price gap exists between what landlords and homeowners might pay in the current market environment.

Analysis of pricing trends is also not feasible due to the stalled market conditions. There is no Q4 2025 data to compare against prior periods, indicating a significant lack of transactional velocity.

The only available historical data, for the period of 2020-2023, also shows zero properties purchased, suggesting that this is not just a recent phenomenon but a characteristic of a market with very low turnover.

The absence of sales data is itself a critical insight, pointing to a market dominated by long-term holds where properties rarely trade hands, leading to a lack of fresh pricing benchmarks.

Chart Section6 Prices
Chart Section6 Prices Alt

Current Quarter Purchase Summary

Analysis of Q4 2025 purchase activity by investor tier and type

Key Insight
Landlords captured 0.0% of the Q4 2025 purchase market, as zero SFR properties were sold.
Detailed Findings

Investor purchasing activity in Chautauqua County was nonexistent in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring 0 of the 0 total SFR properties sold during the period. This reflects a completely frozen transaction market.

The lack of sales meant no new investors entered the market. The count of new single-property landlords (Tier 01) for the quarter was zero, indicating no new capital flowing into the rental sector.

Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who constitute the vast majority of owners in the county, made zero acquisitions in Q4, mirroring the broader market stagnation.

Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) were also entirely inactive, recording zero purchases. Their absence is consistent with the market's overall structure, which lacks any institutional footprint.

The data for Q4 2025 points to a market in a state of stasis, where neither new nor existing investors are transacting, leading to zero quarterly change in the ownership landscape.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control a commanding 94.6% of investor-owned homes.
Detailed Findings

The investor market in Chautauqua County is defined by its granular ownership structure, with mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) controlling 94.6% of all investor-held SFRs.

The foundation of this market is the single-property landlord, with this tier alone comprising 410 properties, or 71.6% of the entire investor portfolio. This highlights the prevalence of small-scale, local investment.

Mid-size investors (11-100 properties) represent a very small fraction of the market, holding a combined 5.2% of investor properties. The scale of ownership drops off sharply after ten properties.

In stark contrast to national narratives, institutional investors (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) have absolutely no presence in Chautauqua County, owning 0.0% of the investor-held housing stock.

The tier distribution underscores a market completely devoid of large-scale corporate ownership, instead relying on a broad base of hundreds of small, local investors as the primary source of rental housing.

Chart Section8 Distribution
Chart Section8 Prices
Chart Section8 Prices Q4

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
Key Insight
Companies become the majority owner in the 11-20 property tier, controlling 60.7% of its properties.
Detailed Findings

Individual investors form the bedrock of the Chautauqua County rental market, particularly in smaller portfolios. In the single-property tier, individuals own 379 of the 410 properties, a commanding 91.5% share.

The balance of power shifts as portfolio sizes increase. The crossover point occurs in the small-medium tier of 11-20 properties, where companies become the majority owners, holding 17 properties (60.7%) compared to 11 held by individuals (39.3%).

This pattern reveals a clear structural divide: individuals dominate entry-level and small-scale investments, while corporate entities are more prevalent among the few landlords who scale up to larger portfolios.

Even in tiers where companies have a presence, such as the 3-5 property range, individuals still maintain a strong majority, owning 33 properties (71.7%) versus 13 for companies (28.3%).

Due to the lack of recent transaction activity, it is not possible to compare acquisition prices or growth patterns between individual and company investors.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
The 67361 zip code is the epicenter of investor activity, holding 267 properties.
Detailed Findings

Investor ownership in Chautauqua County is highly concentrated geographically. The zip code 67361 is the largest hub, with 267 investor-owned properties, representing 47.6% of all investor-held homes in the county.

The second most active area is the 67024 zip code, where investors own 174 properties. Together, these two zip codes account for 441 properties, or 78.6% of the entire investor portfolio.

Analysis of ownership rates reveals even more intense concentration in smaller areas. The 67346 zip code is 100.0% investor-owned, and 67334 has an 82.4% investor ownership rate, indicating these areas function almost exclusively as rental communities.

There is a distinction between the regions with the highest property counts and those with the highest penetration rates. For example, 67361 has the most properties but a lower rate (40.1%) compared to smaller zips like 67334 (82.4%), which have fewer properties but are more saturated with investors.

This geographic distribution highlights specific neighborhoods and towns where non-owner-occupied housing is the norm, profoundly shaping the local community character and housing availability for traditional homebuyers.

Chart Section10 Top Regions
Chart Section10 Top Pct

Historical Transactions

Buy/sell transaction trends over time for all landlords and institutional investors

Key Insight
No historical transaction data is available, preventing analysis of landlord buying and selling patterns.
Detailed Findings

A comprehensive analysis of historical transaction dynamics in Chautauqua County is not possible due to the absence of available data for landlord buy and sell activities over time.

Consequently, key market health indicators, such as the buy/sell ratio, cannot be calculated. It remains unknown whether landlords have historically been in an accumulation or disposition phase.

The volume of inter-landlord trading, a measure of market liquidity and portfolio reshuffling, is also unquantifiable. There is no data on what percentage of transactions occur between existing landlords.

Similarly, it is not possible to compare average buy prices to average sell prices over time, which would typically provide insights into potential investor profit margins and market appreciation.

This data gap, combined with the zero transactions in Q4 2025, reinforces the picture of an opaque and exceptionally low-velocity real estate market for investors.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
The landlord share of Q4 2025 transactions was 0.0%, reflecting a market with no sales activity.
Detailed Findings

In Q4 2025, landlords were involved in 0 of the 0 total SFR transactions in Chautauqua County, resulting in a 0.0% share of an inactive market. This indicates a complete pause in capital deployment and asset turnover.

Transaction volumes were uniformly zero across all investor tiers. Neither the dominant mom-and-pop landlords nor the few mid-size investors engaged in any buying or selling activity during the quarter.

As there were no purchases, it is not possible to analyze acquisition pricing strategies by tier. The average purchase price for all tiers was effectively $0.

The lack of transactions also meant there was no inter-landlord trading. No properties were sold from one landlord to another, highlighting a freeze in portfolio adjustments among existing investors.

The Q4 transaction data confirms the findings from other sections: Chautauqua County's investor market is characterized by high ownership and extremely low, currently nonexistent, liquidity.

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

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Executive Summary

Investors Control Over Half of Chautauqua County's Housing Stock Amid a Completely Frozen Q4 Sales Market
Holdings
In Chautauqua County, landlords own 561 single-family properties, representing a majority 50.4% of the total market. This portfolio is overwhelmingly held by individual investors, who own 484 properties (86.3%), compared to 82 (14.6%) owned by companies.
Pricing
No landlord or homeowner transactions were recorded in Q4 2025, making a price comparison impossible and highlighting a market with no recent sales activity to establish current values.
Activity
Q4 2025 was marked by a complete lack of activity, with landlords purchasing 0 properties for a 0.0% share of all sales. Consequently, zero new single-property landlords entered the market.
Market Share
Small 'mom-and-pop' landlords (1-10 properties) assert near-total control, owning 94.6% of all investor housing. In contrast, institutional investors (1000+ properties) have no presence with a 0.0% share.
Ownership Type
Individual investors are the primary owners in smaller portfolios, but companies become the majority owners at the 11-20 property tier, where they control 60.7% of the properties.
Transactions
With zero recorded buys or sells in Q4 2025, the net position for all landlords is neutral. The lack of data prevents any analysis of buying versus selling behavior or inter-landlord activity.
Market Narrative

The single-family residential market in Chautauqua County, Kansas, is defined by a unique paradox: extremely high investor ownership coupled with exceptionally low liquidity. Landlords control a majority 50.4% of the housing stock, totaling 561 properties. This market is overwhelmingly granular, with individual 'mom-and-pop' investors (1-10 properties) owning a staggering 94.6% of the investor-held portfolio, while institutional firms have zero footprint. This structure points to a community where rental housing is provided by a broad base of small, local owners rather than large corporations.

Investor behavior in Q4 2025 was characterized by complete inaction. There were zero purchases or sales recorded across the entire market, resulting in a 0.0% purchase share for landlords and no new investors entering the field. A significant financial trait of this market is that 100% of the 561 investor-owned properties are held with cash, indicating a debt-averse, long-term hold strategy. The lack of transactions makes it impossible to analyze current pricing, but it underscores a stable, non-speculative environment where assets rarely change hands.

The key takeaway for the Chautauqua County housing market is its status as a static, mature rental ecosystem. The high concentration of investor ownership, particularly in certain zip codes reaching up to 100%, suggests these areas are de facto rental communities. The complete halt in Q4 transactions signals a market that is either perfectly balanced or entirely illiquid, posing significant challenges for anyone looking to buy or sell. This environment favors long-term, income-focused landlords and offers very little opportunity for new entrants or those seeking to exit positions.

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 05:04 PM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyChautauqua (KS)
×
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 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 Section9 Ownership
Chart Section9 Ownership
×
Chart Section9 Growth
Chart Section9 Growth
×
Chart Section9 Growth Q4
Chart Section9 Growth Q4
×
Chart Section10 Top Regions
Chart Section10 Top Regions
×
Chart Section10 Top Pct
Chart Section10 Top Pct