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

Investors hold a substantial footprint in Coffey County, owning 741 Single-Family Residential properties, which constitutes 28.3% of the total 2,616 SFRs in the market.

Ownership is heavily skewed towards individuals, who control 578 properties (78.0%), compared to companies which own 166 properties (22.4%). This points to a market dominated by local, small-scale investors rather than large corporations.

The landlord base is comprised of 868 distinct entities, with 772 being individuals and 96 being companies, reinforcing the prevalence of small-scale ownership.

A striking feature of this market is the complete absence of financing; 100% of the 741 investor-owned properties are held with cash. This financial structure suggests a market of low-leverage, long-term holders rather than speculative investors.

The portfolio is clearly investment-focused, with 722 of the 741 properties identified as rented, indicating that rental income is the primary strategy for nearly all investors in the county.

The real estate market in Coffey County has experienced a period of inactivity, with no recorded purchases for either landlords or traditional homeowners in recent quarters.

Due to the complete lack of sales data, a comparative analysis between landlord and homeowner acquisition prices cannot be performed.

The absence of transactions prevents the calculation of any price gap or discount that investors might typically achieve in an active market.

Similarly, it is not possible to identify pricing trends or measure price appreciation from previous periods like 2020-2023, as no recent comparable sales have occurred.

This market stillness is the most significant finding, indicating a highly illiquid environment where properties are not being actively traded.

The fourth quarter of 2025 saw a complete freeze in investor acquisition activity, with landlords purchasing 0 of the 0 total SFRs sold in Coffey County.

This lack of activity was universal across all investor sizes. 'Mom-and-pop' landlords (1-10 properties) made no new purchases during the quarter.

Likewise, mid-size and institutional investors also recorded zero acquisitions, indicating that no segment of the investor community is currently expanding its portfolio in this market.

Consequently, no new landlords entered the market in Q4, as the number of single-property (Tier 01) acquisitions was zero.

The data points to a market in a holding pattern, with existing investors retaining their properties and no new capital being deployed for acquisitions.

The investor landscape in Coffey County is defined by its small-scale participants. 'Mom-and-pop' landlords, who own between 1 and 10 properties, collectively control a staggering 92.1% of all investor-owned SFRs.

The most significant segment is the single-property landlord (Tier 01), which alone accounts for 519 properties, representing 69.2% of the entire investor portfolio. This highlights the granular nature of rental housing ownership in the area.

Mid-size landlords (11-50 properties) hold a minor share, with Tiers 05 and 06 combined owning just 59 properties, or 7.8% of the total.

There is no evidence of large-scale institutional ownership. Investors in the 1,000+ property tier (Tier 09) have zero presence in Coffey County, a stark contrast to narratives of corporate dominance in other markets.

Due to the lack of recent sales, it is not possible to analyze acquisition price differences between these tiers.

Individual investors form the foundation of the Coffey County rental market, owning the vast majority of properties in smaller portfolios. They control 87.7% of single-property holdings (Tier 01) and 75.0% of two-property portfolios (Tier 02).

A clear crossover point emerges as portfolios grow. Companies become the majority owners in the 11-20 property tier (Small-medium), holding 19 properties for a 55.9% share, compared to 15 properties (44.1%) held by individuals.

This pattern suggests that as investors scale their operations beyond 10 properties, they are more likely to use a corporate structure for ownership and management.

Even in the 6-10 property tier, company ownership becomes significant, accounting for 45.8% of properties.

The absence of transactional data prevents any analysis of whether individuals or companies pay different prices for acquisitions within these tiers.

Investor ownership in Coffey County is not evenly distributed, with certain zip codes showing extremely high concentrations of rental properties.

The highest rate of investor ownership is in the 66852 zip code, where landlords own 40.3% of the 71 SFR properties.

Other areas with heavy investor penetration include 66856, with a 39.1% ownership rate (162 properties), and 66857, with a 32.8% rate (80 properties).

The largest absolute number of investor-owned properties is located in the 66839 zip code, which contains 308 investor-owned homes, representing a 22.4% ownership rate in that area.

In contrast, the 66095 zip code shows no recorded investor-owned properties, highlighting the localized nature of investment strategy within the county.

The historical transaction data for Coffey County reveals a market with extremely low liquidity. There are no recorded buy or sell transactions for landlords across any of the observed timeframes (Q4, Q3, annual, or all-time).

This absence of data is itself a key insight, suggesting that the investor strategy in this county is overwhelmingly buy-and-hold, with very little churn or trading of assets.

As a result, it's impossible to calculate a buy/sell ratio or determine whether landlords have historically been net buyers or sellers.

Analysis of inter-landlord activity is also not possible. The data does not show any instances of landlords selling properties to other investors.

Similarly, without sales, there is no way to compare average buy prices to sell prices to infer potential profit margins or market health.

In Q4 2025, landlords were involved in 0 of the 0 total SFR transactions in Coffey County, resulting in a 0.0% share of market activity.

This inactivity was consistent across all investor sizes, from single-property landlords to the largest tiers. No transactions were recorded for any group.

Due to the lack of purchases, there is no Q4 data on average acquisition prices by tier, so it's not possible to determine which investors might pay more or less in an active market.

The data also shows zero instances of inter-landlord trading, where one investor purchases a property from another landlord.

The complete absence of Q4 transactions reinforces the picture of a static, illiquid market where assets are being held long-term rather than actively traded.