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

Investor ownership in Hodgeman County is exceptionally high, with landlords holding 235 of the 467 single-family residential properties, a market penetration of 50.3%.

The market is overwhelmingly controlled by individual investors rather than corporations. Individuals own 211 properties (89.8% of the investor portfolio), while companies own just 24 properties (10.2%).

A defining characteristic of this market is the complete absence of financing among investors. All 235 landlord-owned properties were acquired with cash, signaling a market insulated from mortgage rate fluctuations.

The investor base is granular, consisting of 293 distinct landlords. This is composed of 271 individual landlords and only 22 company entities, reinforcing the 'mom-and-pop' nature of the local rental market.

The portfolio is heavily geared towards rental income, with 232 of the 235 properties (98.7%) actively rented, demonstrating a clear and focused investment strategy among local owners.

A critical finding for Hodgeman County is the complete absence of sales transactions in Q4 2025, resulting in no available acquisition price data for landlords or traditional homeowners.

The lack of recent comparable sales prevents any analysis of the price gap between investor and homeowner purchases, a key metric in more active markets.

Historical pricing data is also extremely limited, with a placeholder average price of $73,667 for the 2020-2023 period but zero recorded property purchases, indicating a prolonged period of low market liquidity.

The market's inactivity makes it impossible to assess price appreciation or depreciation trends, as there is no transactional data to measure against previous periods.

This data void itself is a significant insight, pointing to a highly illiquid or stable market where properties are tightly held and transactions are exceptionally rare.

The investor purchase market in Hodgeman County was completely dormant in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring zero new single-family properties.

This inactivity was universal across all investor types, as the total number of SFR purchases in the county for the quarter was also zero, indicating a market-wide standstill.

As a result of zero purchasing activity, the landlord share of the Q4 market was 0.0%, a stark contrast to their 50.3% ownership of existing housing stock.

No new investors entered the market during the quarter, as the number of purchases by single-property (Tier 01) landlords was zero.

This lack of transactional activity from any investor tier, from the smallest mom-and-pop to the largest institutional players, highlights a period of extreme market stagnation.

The investor landscape in Hodgeman County is exclusively composed of mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who control 100.0% of the 235 investor-owned SFRs.

Single-property landlords form the bedrock of the market, with 188 distinct entities owning one property each, accounting for 77.7% of all investor-owned housing.

The next largest segments are small landlords with 3-5 properties (29 properties, 12.0% share) and two-property landlords (25 properties, 10.3% share), further cementing small-scale ownership.

There is a complete absence of mid-size (11-1,000 properties) and institutional (1,000+ properties) investors, indicating this market is not a target for large-scale capital.

Due to the lack of recent transactions across any tier, it is not possible to compare acquisition prices or identify any recent shifts in ownership concentration.

Individual investors are the dominant force across every investor tier in Hodgeman County, reinforcing the market's 'mom-and-pop' character.

There is no crossover point where companies become the majority owners. In the highest tier found in the county (3-5 properties), individuals own 26 properties (89.7%) compared to just 3 for companies (10.3%).

The largest concentration of company-owned properties is in the two-property tier, where they own 5 SFRs, but this still only represents 20.0% of that tier's holdings.

Among single-property landlords, the most common type, individuals represent 91.5% of the ownership with 172 properties, versus just 16 properties for companies.

The data clearly shows that company ownership is a fringe activity in this market, with no indication of scaled corporate investment at any portfolio size.

Investor ownership in Hodgeman County is heavily concentrated geographically, with the 67854 zip code alone accounting for 179 properties, or 76.2% of the entire investor-owned portfolio.

The 67849 zip code is the second most significant area, with 52 investor-owned properties, representing 22.1% of the county's total.

Several smaller zip codes exhibit 100.0% investor ownership rates, such as 67547 (2 properties) and 67523 (1 property), indicating specific small pockets with no traditional homeownership.

The high-count region (67854) also has a very high ownership rate at 51.9%, showing that the area with the most volume is also deeply penetrated by investors.

Overall, the data paints a picture of a county with a significant investor presence that is hyper-concentrated in a few key zip codes.

A complete lack of historical transaction data for Hodgeman County prevents any analysis of long-term investor behavior, such as buying and selling trends.

It is not possible to calculate a buy/sell ratio, making it unknown whether landlords have historically been accumulating or divesting properties in the area.

The volume of inter-landlord trading, a key indicator of market liquidity and sophistication, cannot be determined from the available data.

Similarly, a comparison of average buy prices versus sell prices over time, which can imply profitability, is not feasible.

This absence of data suggests a market with very low velocity, where properties are held for long durations with infrequent sales.

Q4 2025 was marked by a complete halt in market activity in Hodgeman County, with a total of zero real estate transactions recorded for single-family homes.

As a result, landlords' share of the transaction market was 0.0%, reflecting the broader market stagnation rather than a specific retreat by investors.

Analysis by tier reveals uniform inactivity; mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) and institutional investors alike recorded zero transactions.

With no purchases occurring, the level of inter-landlord trading was also zero, indicating no portfolio reshuffling or sales between existing market participants.

The average purchase price for all tiers was effectively $0, underscoring the total absence of transactional movement in the final quarter of the year.