Elliott (KY) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Elliott (KY)
409
Total Investors in Elliott (KY)
196
Investor Owned SFR in Elliott (KY)
145(35.5%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
190
SFR Owned
141
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
6
SFR Owned
6
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 145 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

Elliott County: A Mom-and-Pop Investor Stronghold with 35.5% Market Control
Investors own a significant 35.5% of single-family homes in Elliott County, a market entirely controlled by mom-and-pop landlords (100% of holdings). These small-scale, individual investors (97.2% of owners) have been consistent net buyers, though purchasing activity paused in Q4 2025.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 145 SFRs, 35.5% of the market, with individuals holding 97.2%.
The vast majority of investor-owned properties (128 of 145, or 88.3%) are held in cash, with only 11.7% financed. All 145 investor-owned properties are non-owner-occupied, indicating a 100% rental focus for the portfolio.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
Investor acquisition prices more than doubled from the 2020-2023 average to 2024.
The average landlord acquisition price surged from $80,544 during the 2020-2023 period to $194,173 in 2024. Due to a lack of recent transactions, no direct price comparison between landlords and homeowners is available for Q3 or Q4 2025.
Current Quarter Purchases
Investor purchasing activity halted in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring 0% of market sales.
With zero properties purchased by investors in Q4 2025, mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) and institutional investors (Tier 09) both had a 0.0% share of acquisition activity.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords represent 100% of the investor market in Elliott County.
Single-property landlords (Tier 01) are the foundation of the market, owning 134 properties, which accounts for 91.8% of all investor-owned SFRs. Institutional investors (Tier 09) have no presence in this market.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Individual investors overwhelmingly dominate all ownership tiers in Elliott County's market.
Individuals own 96.3% of single-property portfolios and 100% of two-property portfolios. There is no crossover point where companies become majority owners, as they hold only 6 properties in total.
Geographic Distribution
Investor ownership is highly concentrated, with penetration rates reaching 70% in some zip codes.
The 41180 zip code has the highest investor ownership rate at 70.0%, while the 41171 zip code holds the largest number of investor-owned properties at 80, representing a 31.7% rate.
Historical Transactions
Landlords have been consistent net buyers, acquiring properties at a rate of 8-to-1 against sales since 2024.
Across 2024 and 2025, landlords purchased 16 properties while selling only 2, demonstrating a clear strategy of portfolio growth. All activity is from mom-and-pop investors, as there are no institutional transactions.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlords had zero transaction share in Q4 2025, sitting out of the market entirely.
With no landlord transactions in Q4 2025, the market saw no activity from any investor tier, from single-property landlords to institutional players. There were no inter-landlord trades during 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 145 SFRs, 35.5% of the market, with individuals holding 97.2%.
Detailed Findings

Investors hold a substantial 35.5% of the single-family residential market in Elliott County, with a total of 145 properties under their control out of 409 total SFRs.

The investor landscape is overwhelmingly dominated by individuals, who own 141 of the 145 properties (97.2%). This leaves a minimal footprint for corporate investors, who own just 6 properties (4.1%).

This individual dominance is also reflected in the landlord entity count, with 190 individual landlords compared to only 6 company landlords, demonstrating the deeply local, mom-and-pop nature of the rental market.

A striking financial characteristic of this market is the preference for cash ownership. A remarkable 88.3% of investor-owned homes (128 properties) are owned outright, while only 17 properties (11.7%) are financed, suggesting low leverage and high equity among local landlords.

The portfolio is entirely focused on rentals, as 100% of the 145 investor-owned properties are classified as non-owner-occupied.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
Investor acquisition prices more than doubled from the 2020-2023 average to 2024.
Detailed Findings

Analysis of historical acquisition prices reveals significant appreciation in Elliott County. The average price paid by landlords jumped from $80,544 between 2020-2023 to $194,173 in 2024, a 141.1% increase.

Recent market activity has been too sparse to draw meaningful conclusions on pricing. There were zero landlord purchases recorded in Q4 2025, and data for Q3 2025 showed an average price of $84,000 based on zero properties purchased, indicating a lack of transactions.

A direct comparison between landlord and traditional homeowner prices is unavailable for recent quarters due to the low transaction volume and incomplete homeowner data for the periods.

The limited data for 2025 suggests a potential cooling of prices from the 2024 peak, with a year-to-date average of $57,750, though this is based on zero properties purchased and should be interpreted with caution.

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

Key Insight
Investor purchasing activity halted in Q4 2025, with landlords acquiring 0% of market sales.
Detailed Findings

Investor acquisition activity came to a complete standstill in Elliott County during Q4 2025. Of the 2 total SFR purchases in the market, none were made by landlords, resulting in a 0% market share for investors.

The lack of activity was universal across all investor sizes. Mom-and-pop landlords, who constitute the entirety of the local investor base, made zero purchases.

Similarly, institutional investors (Tier 09) remained absent from the market, recording zero purchases, consistent with their overall 0.0% ownership share in the county.

This halt in purchasing marks a significant slowdown compared to previous years where landlords were actively acquiring properties.

Consequently, no new landlords entered the market in Q4, and there was no purchasing activity to analyze by tier for the quarter.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords represent 100% of the investor market in Elliott County.
Detailed Findings

The investor ownership structure in Elliott County is the definition of a mom-and-pop market, with 100% of the 145 investor-owned properties held by landlords in the 1-10 property tiers (Tiers 01-04).

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) form the backbone of the market, controlling a massive 91.8% share with 134 properties. This highlights a market composed primarily of small, first-time, or single-investment landlords.

The next largest tiers are minimal in comparison: two-property landlords hold 5 properties (3.4%), and small landlords with 3-5 properties hold 7 properties (4.8%).

There is absolutely no institutional investor (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) presence in Elliott County, underscoring its isolation from large-scale corporate real estate investment trends.

Due to the lack of recent purchasing activity, pricing analysis by tier is not available for Q4 2025.

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
Individual investors overwhelmingly dominate all ownership tiers in Elliott County's market.
Detailed Findings

Individual investors are the sole drivers of the Elliott County rental market, maintaining a vast majority across all existing portfolio tiers. Companies have a negligible presence, owning only 6 of the 145 investor properties.

In the largest tier of single-property landlords, individuals own 131 properties (96.3%) compared to just 5 for companies (3.7%).

The individual dominance is absolute in the two-property tier, where they own 100% of the 5 properties.

Even in the small 3-5 property tier, individuals own 6 of the 7 properties (85.7%), demonstrating that company ownership does not scale with portfolio size in this market.

Consequently, there is no 'crossover point' where companies overtake individuals. The market structure is firmly rooted in small-scale, personal ownership.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor ownership is highly concentrated, with penetration rates reaching 70% in some zip codes.
Detailed Findings

Investor activity in Elliott County shows significant geographic concentration, with certain zip codes having extremely high rates of landlord ownership. The top five zip codes all exhibit investor ownership rates above 34%.

The zip code 41180 stands out with the highest penetration rate, where 70.0% of its SFR properties are investor-owned. Other areas with high concentration include 41149 (57.9%) and 40351 (47.8%).

The largest volume of investor properties is located in the 41171 zip code, which contains 80 landlord-owned homes, translating to a 31.7% ownership rate in that area.

The zip code with the highest ownership rate (41180, 70.0%) and the one with the highest count (41171, 80 properties) are different, indicating that penetration is highest in smaller sub-markets.

This data points to a market where rental properties are a dominant feature of the housing landscape in specific local communities.

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
Key Insight
Landlords have been consistent net buyers, acquiring properties at a rate of 8-to-1 against sales since 2024.
Detailed Findings

Historically, landlords in Elliott County have operated as strong net buyers, consistently adding more properties to their portfolios than they sell. In 2024, investors bought 11 properties and sold only 1.

This trend of accumulation continued into 2025, with landlords purchasing 5 properties and selling only 1, resulting in a net gain of 4 properties for the year.

Combining the last two years, investors have a buy-to-sell ratio of 8-to-1 (16 buys vs. 2 sells), signaling strong confidence in the local rental market and a focus on long-term holds.

All recorded historical transactions are attributable to mom-and-pop landlords, as institutional investors have no presence or transaction history in the county.

The data does not contain information on landlord-to-landlord transaction percentages.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
Landlords had zero transaction share in Q4 2025, sitting out of the market entirely.
Detailed Findings

In Q4 2025, landlords were completely inactive in the Elliott County transaction market. Out of 3 total SFR transactions, none involved a landlord as either a buyer or seller, resulting in a 0% landlord transaction share.

This inactivity was uniform across all investor tiers. Mom-and-pop investors (Tiers 01-04), who own 100% of the rental stock, made no purchases or sales.

Institutional investors (Tier 09) also recorded zero transactions, which is consistent with their lack of ownership in the county.

As there were no landlord purchases, the average purchase price for all tiers was $0, and there was no inter-landlord trading activity to analyze.

This Q4 freeze in investor activity contrasts with the historical trend of landlords being consistent net buyers in the region.

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

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Executive Summary

Mom-and-Pop Landlords Dominate Elliott County with 35.5% of Homes, Pause Acquisitions in Q4
Holdings
Investors own 145 single-family properties in Elliott County, representing a significant 35.5% of the total market. The ownership is almost entirely in the hands of individual investors, who hold 141 properties (97.2%).
Pricing
Sufficient recent data is unavailable for a landlord-homeowner price comparison, but historical data shows landlord acquisition prices surged 141.1% from an average of $80,544 in 2020-2023 to $194,173 in 2024.
Activity
Investor purchasing activity paused in Q4 2025, with landlords accounting for 0 of the 2 home sales (0.0% share). This period of inactivity saw zero new landlords enter the market.
Market Share
Small mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) exert total control over the investor market, owning 100.0% of all rental homes. In contrast, institutional investors (1000+ properties) have zero presence.
Ownership Type
Individual investors are the dominant force across all portfolio sizes, owning 97.2% of investor properties. There is no crossover tier where companies become the majority owners in Elliott County.
Transactions
Landlords have been strong net buyers historically, acquiring 16 properties versus only 2 sales since the start of 2024. However, Q4 2025 saw a complete halt, with zero landlord buy or sell transactions.
Market Narrative

The single-family housing market in Elliott County, Kentucky, is uniquely characterized by a high concentration of small, local investors. Landlords own a substantial 145 properties, which constitutes 35.5% of the entire SFR market. This landscape is built by individual investors, who own 97.2% of these rental homes, and is entirely controlled by mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), with zero ownership by large institutional firms. This structure points to a deeply embedded, community-level rental market rather than one influenced by national corporate players.

Investor behavior has historically been focused on accumulation, with landlords acting as consistent net buyers, acquiring 8 properties for every 1 they sold since early 2024. This growth was fueled by significant price appreciation, with average acquisition costs more than doubling from 2020-2023 to 2024. However, this momentum came to a halt in the final quarter of 2025, as investors made zero purchases, abstaining from the market entirely. A remarkable 88.3% of their holdings are owned outright in cash, indicating a financially stable and low-leverage investor base.

The key takeaway for Elliott County is the portrait of a resilient, self-contained rental market dominated by mom-and-pop investors with a long-term buy-and-hold strategy. The recent pause in acquisitions may signal a response to pricing peaks or a simple lack of available inventory, but the underlying structure of high ownership concentration and deep individual control remains the market's defining feature. This hyper-local investor dominance, with penetration rates reaching as high as 70% in some zip codes, has fundamentally shaped the local housing supply.

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 06:55 PM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyElliott (KY)
×
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 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