Holmes (MS) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

Investor-owned properties constitute a significant majority of the Single Family Residential (SFR) market in Holmes County, MS, with 2,269 properties out of 4,101 total SFRs, a substantial 55.3% market penetration. This highlights a market heavily shaped by investment activity.

Individual landlords overwhelmingly dominate the investor landscape, holding 2,040 properties, which accounts for 89.9% of all investor-owned SFRs. In stark contrast, companies own only 263 properties (11.6%), underscoring the mom-and-pop nature of the local rental market.

The ownership structure is further reinforced by entity counts, with individual landlords making up 90.2% (2,225) of the total 2,467 landlord entities, demonstrating that the vast majority of investors are individuals rather than corporate entities.

Landlord portfolios in Holmes County are heavily concentrated in cash purchases, with 2,258 properties acquired via cash compared to only 11 properties that are financed. This pattern suggests a preference for debt-free assets or a market where traditional financing for investment properties is less common.

Nearly all investor-owned properties are rented, totaling 2,256 properties, closely aligning with the 2,269 total investor-owned SFRs. This indicates an extremely high non-owner-occupied rate and a strong focus on generating rental income from acquired properties.

A critical observation for Holmes County, MS, in Q4 2025 is the complete absence of recorded Single Family Residential (SFR) acquisition transactions. This means no data is available to analyze landlord, homeowner, or overall market purchase prices for the quarter.

This lack of purchasing activity prevents any comparison of landlord acquisition prices against those of traditional homeowners. Without any Q4 transactions, there's no basis to determine if landlords are paying more or less than other buyers.

Similarly, the absence of data precludes any analysis of how the landlord-homeowner price gap might have changed quarter-over-quarter, or to identify any specific pricing trends for 2024 or 2020-2023 within this county.

The lack of recorded acquisitions implies a dormant or frozen sales market for SFR properties during Q4 2025, suggesting a significant pause in investment or general buying activity in the region.

Consequently, it is impossible to assess if individual and company landlords engage in different pricing strategies or to track price appreciation from previous periods, as no transactions have occurred to provide this information.

Holmes County, MS, experienced a complete standstill in SFR purchase activity during Q4 2025, with zero total recorded purchases. This stark absence of transactions signifies a profoundly inactive market for residential property acquisitions.

Landlords registered 0 SFR purchases in Q4 2025, accounting for 0.0% of the total market purchases. This complete lack of landlord buying activity points to a significant pause or withdrawal of investor interest in the county during this period.

The market's dormancy extends across all investor tiers; neither mom-and-pop landlords (Tier 01-04) nor institutional investors (Tier 09) recorded any purchases in Q4 2025. Both segments show 0.0% of landlord purchases, indicating a uniform lack of engagement.

With no new landlords (single-property, Tier 01) entering the market and no entities active across any tier in Q4, the data strongly suggests a complete absence of new investment in SFR properties for the quarter.

The complete lack of Q4 activity means there is no basis to analyze which tiers are most active, the average properties per entity by tier, or any concentration patterns, as the market was entirely inactive.

The investor-owned SFR market in Holmes County, MS, is overwhelmingly dominated by mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who collectively control 99.0% of all investor-owned SFR properties. This highlights a highly decentralized ownership structure.

Specifically, single-property landlords (Tier 01) represent the vast majority, holding 2,002 distinct SFR properties, which accounts for a significant 87.2% of the total investor-owned portfolio. This makes individual, small-scale investors the primary drivers of the rental market.

There is a complete absence of institutional investors (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) in Holmes County, MS, reinforcing the market's mom-and-pop character. This deviates from national narratives that often emphasize institutional dominance.

Smaller multi-property landlords also contribute significantly; two-property landlords (Tier 02) own 133 properties (5.8%), and those with 3-5 properties (Tier 03) hold 115 properties (5.0%), further solidifying the small landlord concentration.

Due to the absence of recorded purchase transactions in Q4 2025 and other timeframes, no acquisition pricing data by tier is available. Therefore, analysis of how prices vary by tier or whether larger investors pay more or less is not possible.

Comparing current ownership distribution to historical trends (All Time vs recent quarters) is also limited by the lack of new transaction data. However, the existing concentration clearly demonstrates enduring small landlord prevalence.

Individual investors overwhelmingly dominate all tiers of SFR ownership in Holmes County, MS, maintaining a significant majority even as portfolio sizes increase. This underscores the personal investment focus in the local market.

The crossover point where company ownership becomes equal to individual ownership is found only at the Small-medium (21-50 properties) tier, where it stands at a 50.0% split (1 individual vs 1 company owned property). For all other listed tiers, individuals hold the majority.

In the largest active tier with reported data, Small-medium (11-20 properties), individuals still control 90.9% of properties (10 properties) compared to companies at 9.1% (1 property), demonstrating strong individual presence even in moderately sized portfolios.

Even in the 6-10 property tier, individuals maintain a majority, holding 56.5% of properties (13 properties) against companies' 43.5% (10 properties), indicating that corporate entities are active but not dominant in these mid-range portfolios.

Single-property portfolios (Tier 01) are almost entirely individual-owned at 90.2% (1,832 properties), with companies holding only 9.8% (198 properties), establishing individuals as the foundational owners in the entry-level investment market.

Due to the complete absence of recorded purchase transactions for Q4 2025 and other timeframes, there is no available data to compare individual vs. company acquisition prices within each tier or to analyze differential growth patterns by owner type over time.

Within Holmes County, MS, zip code 39095 emerges as the primary hub for investor-owned properties, accounting for 941 SFRs with a substantial ownership rate of 54.9%. This concentration highlights specific areas attracting significant investment.

Beyond absolute counts, several zip codes exhibit exceptionally high investor ownership rates, indicating deep market penetration. Zip code 39079 leads with 67.0% of its SFRs being investor-owned, closely followed by 39146 at 66.7% and 39169 at 62.9%.

The data reveals a strong correlation between areas with high property counts and high investor ownership percentages. For example, 39146 (302 properties, 66.7%) and 39169 (258 properties, 62.9%) appear prominently in both top lists, signaling dense investor activity in these specific localities.

The widespread investor presence is evident as three of the top five zip codes by ownership rate show over 60% investor penetration. Even areas like 38924 have 59.5% investor-owned properties, indicating a county-wide trend of significant landlord involvement.

Due to the complete lack of recorded acquisition transactions in Q4 2025 and other timeframes for Holmes County, no data is available to analyze how acquisition prices vary across these specific geographic regions.

The reported 'nan' properties for MS-Holmes-39039 by count indicates missing or unrecorded data for that specific sub-geography, excluding it from meaningful comparative analysis for both count and percentage metrics.

A significant finding for Holmes County, MS, is the complete absence of historical transaction data for all landlords. No buy or sell transaction counts or average prices are recorded across any timeframe, including Q4, previous quarters, or annual periods.

This critical data gap extends specifically to institutional investors (Tier 1000+), for whom no transaction counts or pricing information is available. This prevents any analysis of whether larger investors are accumulating or divesting properties in the county.

Consequently, it is impossible to determine if landlords in Holmes County are overall net buyers or net sellers, as there are no recorded transactions to calculate a buy/sell ratio. The market's transactional status remains unknown.

The lack of data also precludes any insights into inter-landlord trading activity, meaning we cannot assess what percentage of buy or sell transactions involve other landlords, which is a key indicator of market liquidity and internal dynamics.

Without recorded buy and sell prices, it's impossible to calculate an implied margin for landlords or to understand transaction price dynamics over time. This makes it challenging to assess profitability or pricing strategies in the county's investor market.

The consistent absence of transaction data across all historical timeframes, including annual and quarterly views, suggests either an extremely dormant transactional market or a limitation in data capture for Holmes County, MS.

Holmes County, MS, reported zero total SFR transactions in Q4 2025, mirroring the complete absence of purchase activity. This indicates a fully stagnant market with no recorded sales of residential properties during the quarter.

Landlords were involved in 0 transactions during Q4 2025, accounting for 0.0% of all market activity. This complete lack of landlord participation in buying or selling signals a total withdrawal or pause in investor engagement.

As there were no transactions, no average purchase prices by tier could be calculated. This means it is impossible to determine which investor tiers, if any, paid the most or least for properties in Q4, or to establish any price spreads.

The complete inactivity also means there was no inter-landlord trading, so the percentage of properties bought from other landlords is 0.0%. This indicates no internal market liquidity among investors during the quarter.

Both mom-and-pop (Tier 01-04) and institutional (Tier 09) investors recorded zero transactions in Q4 2025, reinforcing the widespread dormancy across all investor sizes in the county's SFR market.

The current quarter's transaction data, or rather the lack thereof, stands in stark contrast to the existing high investor ownership, suggesting a holding pattern among current owners rather than active trading or acquisition.