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

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Clay (KS)
2,844
Total Investors in Clay (KS)
867
Investor Owned SFR in Clay (KS)
786(27.6%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
777
SFR Owned
592
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
90
SFR Owned
197
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 786 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, Individual Cash Buyers Dominate Clay County's Stable Rental Market with 91.9% Ownership
Investors own 786 SFRs in Clay County (27.6% of the market), with 'mom-and-pop' landlords controlling 91.9% of that inventory. The market is characterized by a complete lack of recent purchasing activity in Q4 2025 and 100% cash ownership, indicating a stable, long-term hold strategy by local individuals.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Landlords own 786 SFR properties in Clay County, with individual investors holding a dominant 75.3% share.
All 786 investor-owned properties were acquired with cash, with zero properties currently financed. Of these, 754 are classified as rented, indicating a strong 95.9% rental focus.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
No landlord purchase data is available for Q4, preventing a direct price comparison with homeowners.
The absence of recent transaction data suggests a market with extremely low liquidity. Historical data from 2020-2023 lists an average acquisition price of $84,094, but this is based on a dataset with zero recorded purchases.
Current Quarter Purchases
The Clay County investor market was completely inactive in Q4 2025, with landlords making 0.0% of market purchases.
No new properties were acquired by any investor tier, from new single-property landlords to larger operators. This resulted in zero new market entrants for the quarter.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) overwhelmingly control 91.9% of Clay County's investor-owned SFRs.
Single-property landlords alone own 524 properties, a 63.4% majority. Institutional investors (1000+ properties) have zero presence in the market.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Individuals own most small portfolios, but companies become the majority owners at the 6-10 property tier.
In the 6-10 property tier, companies own 31 properties (70.5%) versus 13 for individuals (29.5%). Individuals strongly dominate the single-property tier, owning 468 homes (89.0%).
Geographic Distribution
Investor activity in Clay County is highly concentrated, with the 67432 zip code holding 521 properties.
Some smaller zip codes show extremely high investor penetration rates, with both 67410 and 67466 reporting 50.0% investor ownership. The 66937 zip code also has a high rate of 31.8%.
Historical Transactions
No historical transaction data is available, indicating an extremely illiquid landlord-to-landlord market.
The absence of buy/sell data for all landlords and institutional tiers prevents any analysis of net buyer/seller status or price margins. This points to a long-term hold market.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlords conducted zero transactions in Q4 2025, representing 0.0% of an inactive market.
There was no transaction activity across any investor tier in Q4. This complete market dormancy prevents any analysis of pricing strategies or inter-landlord trading for the period.

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
Landlords own 786 SFR properties in Clay County, with individual investors holding a dominant 75.3% share.
Detailed Findings

Investors hold a significant 27.6% share of the Single-Family Residential market in Clay County, owning 786 of the 2,844 total SFR properties.

Individual "mom-and-pop" investors are the cornerstone of the local rental market, owning 592 properties, which accounts for 75.3% of all investor-owned SFRs. In contrast, company investors own the remaining 197 properties (25.1%).

The ownership landscape is skewed heavily towards individuals by entity count, with 777 individual landlords compared to just 90 company landlords, a ratio of nearly 9 to 1.

A striking feature of this market is the complete absence of financing; 100% of the 786 investor-owned properties are held as cash assets. This indicates a low-leverage, financially stable investor base.

The portfolio is overwhelmingly dedicated to rentals, with 754 of the 786 properties (95.9%) classified as rented. This high concentration underscores the primary strategy of local investors: providing long-term rental housing rather than short-term speculation.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
No landlord purchase data is available for Q4, preventing a direct price comparison with homeowners.
Detailed Findings

There is no available data for landlord or traditional homeowner purchases in Q4 2025 in Clay County, making a direct price comparison impossible for the current period.

The lack of recent transaction data suggests a market with extremely low liquidity and turnover, where properties are held for the long term.

Historical data covering the 2020-2023 period shows an average landlord acquisition price of $84,094, but this figure is based on a dataset with zero recorded property purchases during that time.

Without recent sales, it is not possible to analyze trends like price appreciation or the widening or narrowing of any potential discount between investor and homeowner purchases.

The static nature of the market, as implied by the absence of pricing data, aligns with the holdings data showing a stable, cash-owned portfolio rather than an active, transactional one.

Chart Section6 Prices
Chart Section6 Prices Alt

Current Quarter Purchase Summary

Analysis of Q4 2025 purchase activity by investor tier and type

Key Insight
The Clay County investor market was completely inactive in Q4 2025, with landlords making 0.0% of market purchases.
Detailed Findings

Investor purchasing activity came to a complete standstill in Clay County during Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring zero of the zero total SFRs sold.

This inactivity was universal across all investor sizes; mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) recorded zero purchases, accounting for 0.0% of the nonexistent landlord activity.

Similarly, institutional investors (1,000+ properties), who have no presence in the county, also made no acquisitions, reflecting a total market dormancy.

The quarter saw no new landlords entering the market, as the number of single-property (Tier 01) entities making purchases was zero.

This lack of purchasing activity highlights a "hold" strategy among existing landlords and a lack of new investment flowing into the county's SFR rental market during this period.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) overwhelmingly control 91.9% of Clay County's investor-owned SFRs.
Detailed Findings

The investor landscape in Clay County is dominated by small-scale operators. Landlords owning 1-10 properties (Tiers 01-04) control a combined 91.9% of all investor-owned SFR housing.

First-time or single-investment landlords (Tier 01) form the bedrock of the market, owning 524 properties, which represents a 63.4% majority of the entire investor portfolio.

Mid-size landlords are a minor segment, with those owning 11-50 properties holding only 7.7% of the inventory combined.

In stark contrast to national narratives, there is zero institutional ownership in Clay County. The 1,000+ property tier (Tier 09) holds 0.0% of the market share, reinforcing the local, small-investor character of the area.

The largest active investors in the county fall into the 21-50 and 101-1000 property tiers, which collectively own just 54 properties (6.6% of the total).

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
Individuals own most small portfolios, but companies become the majority owners at the 6-10 property tier.
Detailed Findings

While individual investors dominate the overall market, a clear crossover point occurs as portfolios grow. Companies assume majority ownership in the 6-10 property tier, holding 70.5% (31 properties) of assets in that segment.

In the smallest tiers, individual ownership is overwhelming. Individuals own 89.0% of single-property portfolios (468 properties) and 85.1% of two-property portfolios (63 properties).

The transition toward corporate ownership begins in the 3-5 property tier, where companies hold a notable 26.5% share (31 properties).

This pattern suggests a strategic shift where investors incorporate as their holdings expand, likely for liability and management purposes, moving from personal ownership to a formal business structure.

There is no pricing data available to compare acquisition strategies between individuals and companies within these tiers, but the ownership structure reveals a clear evolution in operational strategy as scale increases.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor activity in Clay County is highly concentrated, with the 67432 zip code holding 521 properties.
Detailed Findings

Investor ownership in Clay County is geographically concentrated, with a single zip code, 67432, accounting for 521 investor-owned SFRs. This area represents the core of the county's rental market.

In 67432, investors own 25.0% of the SFR properties, indicating a substantial rental presence in the county's most active housing market.

While concentration by count is in one area, the highest rates of ownership occur in smaller micro-markets. The zip codes of 67410 and 67466 both show a 50.0% investor ownership rate, suggesting half of the SFR stock in these areas are rentals.

The zip code 66937 also shows a high concentration with a 31.8% investor ownership rate on a base of 41 investor-owned properties.

The data highlights a dual dynamic: a large volume of investor properties in one core zip code, and extremely high penetration rates in smaller, more rural zip codes.

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, indicating an extremely illiquid landlord-to-landlord market.
Detailed Findings

Transactional data for landlords in Clay County is unavailable, which strongly suggests a market characterized by long-term holds rather than frequent buying and selling.

It is not possible to determine if landlords are net buyers or sellers, as there are no recorded buy or sell transactions in the historical dataset provided.

Similarly, the degree of inter-landlord trading cannot be measured. The data does not show any instances of investors buying properties from or selling properties to other landlords.

Institutional investors (1,000+ tier) have no transactional history in the county, which aligns with their 0.0% ownership share and reinforces their absence from this market.

The lack of transaction velocity implies that the investor-owned housing stock is stable, with very few properties changing hands among investors or being sold on the open market.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
Landlords conducted zero transactions in Q4 2025, representing 0.0% of an inactive market.
Detailed Findings

The investor transaction market in Clay County was entirely dormant in Q4 2025, with landlords involved in zero of the zero total SFR transactions recorded for the quarter.

This lack of activity was consistent across all portfolio sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) and institutional investors (Tier 09) both recorded zero transactions.

Consequently, there is no data to analyze Q4 purchase prices by tier, preventing any comparison of buying strategies between small and large investors.

Inter-landlord trading was also nonexistent, with zero properties bought from other landlords during the quarter.

This complete halt in Q4 transactional activity mirrors the purchasing data, painting a picture of a static market where existing investors are holding their assets and no new investors are deploying capital.

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

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Executive Summary

Small, individual cash buyers dominate Clay County's stable rental market with 91.9% ownership and zero recent activity.
Holdings
In Clay County, landlords own 786 SFR properties, representing 27.6% of the market. The portfolio is overwhelmingly held by individual investors, who own 592 properties (75.3%), compared to 197 (25.1%) for companies.
Pricing
No pricing data for Q4 2025 is available due to a complete lack of transactions, preventing a comparison between landlord and homeowner purchase prices.
Activity
Investor purchase activity was nonexistent in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring 0 properties (0.0% of sales) and no new single-property landlords entering the market.
Market Share
Small "mom-and-pop" landlords (1-10 properties) control 91.9% of all investor-owned housing in Clay County, while institutional investors (1000+) have no presence (0.0%).
Ownership Type
Individual investors form the backbone of the market, but companies become the majority owner in the 6-10 property tier, controlling 70.5% of properties in that segment.
Transactions
Due to a lack of recorded transactions, landlords' net buyer or seller status cannot be determined for Q4 2025. The market showed no transactional activity.
Market Narrative

The investor landscape in Clay County, Kansas, is defined by local, small-scale ownership rather than large corporate entities. Investors own a significant 786 Single-Family Residential properties, comprising 27.6% of the county's total SFR market. This portfolio is overwhelmingly controlled by individuals, who own 592 properties (75.3%), dwarfing the 197 properties (25.1%) held by companies. The market structure is firmly rooted in "mom-and-pop" landlords (1-10 properties), who command a 91.9% share of all investor housing, while institutional investors have zero presence.

Investor behavior in Clay County is characterized by stability and a complete absence of recent transactional activity. During Q4 2025, landlords made zero purchases and were involved in zero sales, indicating a market focused on long-term holds. A key feature of this stability is the financial structure of these holdings; 100% of the 786 investor-owned properties are owned outright with cash, with no properties financed. This low-leverage approach points to a risk-averse, financially secure investor base that is not driven by speculative buying and selling.

The key takeaway for the Clay County housing market is the presence of a deeply entrenched, stable, and locally dominated rental sector. The lack of transactions and reliance on cash purchases signals a market insulated from the volatility of interest rate fluctuations and national investment trends. This suggests that the rental housing supply is secure and managed by community-based individuals, contrasting sharply with the common narrative of corporate consolidation in the single-family rental space. The market's future will likely be shaped by these long-term holders rather than by new, incoming capital.

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 05:07 PM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyClay (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