New Hanover (NC) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

Investors hold a significant 23.0% share of the single-family residential market in New Hanover County, totaling 15,401 properties.

The investor landscape is overwhelmingly dominated by 15,713 individual landlords who own 12,291 properties, accounting for 79.8% of the investor-owned housing stock. In contrast, 1,885 company investors own the remaining 3,285 properties (21.3%), indicating a market driven by small-scale participants rather than large corporations.

A strong preference for all-cash acquisitions is evident, with 9,529 properties owned outright compared to 5,872 that are financed. This suggests that a majority of investor-held assets are un-leveraged, potentially indicating a more stable, long-term investment strategy across the county.

The portfolio is almost entirely dedicated to rentals, with 15,194 of the 15,401 investor-owned properties being rented. This high concentration underscores the primary role these properties play in supplying housing for the local rental market.

The ratio of individual to company landlords is approximately 8.3 to 1, further emphasizing the granular, fragmented nature of SFR ownership in New Hanover. This challenges the narrative of a market controlled by a few large entities.

In Q4 2025, landlords in New Hanover County acquired properties at an average price of $598,297, securing a 2.8% discount compared to traditional homeowners who paid $615,607. This price advantage translated to an average savings of $17,310 per home.

The price gap between landlords and homeowners has narrowed dramatically. The modest 2.8% discount in Q4 is a sharp reduction from the 17.0% ($100,842) discount observed in Q3 2025, indicating that investors are facing stiffer competition and paying closer to market rates.

A clear trend of price appreciation is visible, with the average landlord acquisition price of $598,297 in Q4 2025 representing a significant 36.1% increase from the 2020-2023 average of $439,627. This reflects the broader housing market's rapid value growth in the region.

Quarter-over-quarter analysis reveals a volatile but persistent landlord discount throughout 2025. The savings fluctuated from 8.7% in Q1, to 6.9% in Q2, peaked at 17.0% in Q3, before settling at the year's low of 2.8% in Q4.

This sustained, albeit shrinking, price advantage suggests that investors, through various strategies like cash offers or targeting distressed properties, consistently acquire homes for less than the average homebuyer, even in a competitive market.

Investor activity accounted for 29.9% of all SFR sales in New Hanover County during Q4 2025, with landlords purchasing 199 of the 665 homes sold. This substantial market share highlights their ongoing role in driving housing demand.

The market's new entrants are overwhelmingly small-scale, with 225 new single-property landlords acquiring 154 homes. This tier alone constituted 73.3% of all investor purchases, signaling a robust and active entry-level investor base.

Mom-and-pop landlords (owning 1-10 properties) completely dominated Q4 acquisition activity, collectively buying 203 properties. This represents 96.7% of all landlord-purchased homes, reinforcing that small investors are the primary drivers of market activity.

Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) had a negligible presence, acquiring only one property in Q4. This minimal activity, accounting for just 0.5% of landlord purchases, starkly contrasts with the high volume from smaller tiers.

The data reveals a clear pyramid of purchasing power, with activity heavily concentrated at the bottom. Single-property landlords (154 properties) and two-property landlords (27 properties) together made up 86.2% of all investor acquisitions for the quarter.

The ownership structure of investor-held SFRs in New Hanover County is overwhelmingly dominated by mom-and-pop landlords. Those owning 1-10 properties (Tiers 01-04) collectively hold 14,598 homes, which amounts to a commanding 92.9% share of the total investor portfolio.

Single-property landlords are the bedrock of the rental market, owning 11,763 properties. This single tier accounts for 74.8% of all investor-owned housing, demonstrating the highly fragmented nature of ownership.

In sharp contrast, institutional investors with portfolios of 1,000 or more properties have a minimal footprint, owning just 44 properties. Their 0.3% market share challenges the perception that large corporations are controlling the local housing market.

Mid-size landlords (11-1000 properties) represent a small fraction of the market, collectively owning 1,113 properties or 7.1% of the investor-owned stock. This indicates a significant gap between the vast number of small landlords and the few large-scale operators.

The distribution is heavily skewed towards the smallest investors, with nearly three-quarters of all properties held by landlords who own only one investment property. This pattern underscores the importance of individual investors in providing rental housing in the county.

A distinct crossover point occurs in portfolios of 6-10 properties, where company ownership (235 properties, 56.6%) surpasses individual ownership (180 properties, 43.4%). This marks the tier where investment strategies begin to formalize under corporate structures.

Individual investors are the undisputed leaders in smaller-scale ownership. They own 10,612 (89.2%) of single-property investor homes and 864 (73.8%) of two-property portfolios, demonstrating their foundational role in the rental market.

As portfolio sizes increase, company ownership rapidly accelerates. In the 11-20 property tier, companies own 228 properties (80.3%), and this concentration intensifies in the 21-50 property tier, where they own 313 properties, a commanding 94.0% share.

The data illustrates a clear pattern of professionalization. While individuals initiate their investment journeys, scaling beyond five properties often involves incorporating, likely for liability protection and financial management benefits.

Even within the smallest tiers, a corporate presence exists, with companies owning 1,289 (10.8%) of single-property investments. This suggests some investors utilize an LLC or similar entity from their very first purchase.

Investor activity is heavily concentrated geographically, with the top five zip codes by count holding a combined 10,202 properties, which is 66.2% of all investor-owned SFRs in New Hanover County.

The zip code 28403 is the epicenter of investor ownership by volume, containing 2,648 investor-held properties. This area, along with 28401 (2,084 properties), represents the two largest clusters of investor activity.

There is a clear distinction between areas with high investor counts and those with high investor penetration rates. The zip code 28480 (Wrightsville Beach) has the highest ownership rate at 56.8%, followed by 28449 (Kure Beach) at 56.5%, suggesting these vacation-oriented areas are prime targets for investment properties despite having lower total counts.

Significant investor penetration is not limited to a single area. Five zip codes—28480, 28449, 28428, 28401, and 28403—all exhibit investor ownership rates exceeding 30%, signaling a broad and deep investor presence throughout the county.

The top two regions by property count, 28403 and 28401, also feature high ownership rates of 31.8% and 32.6% respectively. This overlap indicates these areas are core to both the scale and concentration of real estate investment in New Hanover.

Landlords in New Hanover County are consistently expanding their portfolios, acting as strong net buyers. In Q4 2025, they purchased 288 properties while selling only 60, resulting in a net gain of 228 homes and a buy-to-sell ratio of 4.8-to-1.

This aggressive acquisition trend is not new; landlords have been net buyers for the past two full years. In 2025, they added a net 1,062 properties, nearly identical to the net 1,054 properties added in 2024, showing sustained and stable market accumulation.

A significant strategic divergence is evident between the overall landlord market and institutional players. While the broader market was buying heavily in Q4, institutional investors (1,000+ tier) were net sellers, offloading two properties and buying only one. This indicates a potential strategic retreat by the largest players.

The institutional net selling in Q4 2025 follows a pattern of minimal or negative growth. They were also net neutral or net sellers in Q3 2025 and for the full year of 2024, reinforcing their trend of divestment or stagnation while smaller investors expand.

The transaction data clearly shows two different market narratives: a broad base of landlords actively growing their holdings, and a small segment of large-scale institutions either pausing acquisitions or strategically trimming their portfolios in New Hanover County.

In Q4 2025, landlords participated in 26.8% of all 1,073 SFR transactions, acquiring 288 properties and demonstrating significant influence on market activity.

A dramatic pricing disparity reveals different acquisition strategies across investor tiers. First-time landlords in the single-property tier paid the highest average price at $610,263. In contrast, the sole institutional purchase was at $238,000, a staggering 61.0% lower, suggesting a focus on fundamentally different types of assets or deal structures.

Transaction volume is overwhelmingly concentrated among the smallest investors. Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) conducted 280 of the 288 landlord transactions (97.2%), while the single institutional transaction accounted for just 0.3% of the volume.

The source of properties varies by tier, highlighting different buying channels. The institutional investor's purchase was a landlord-to-landlord transaction (100%). Conversely, new single-property landlords rarely bought from their peers, with only 11.1% of their purchases coming from other investors, indicating they primarily buy from homeowners.

The data suggests that as investors scale, their acquisition prices decrease and their reliance on inter-landlord transactions increases. Mid-size investors in the 11-20 tier also showed this pattern, paying a low average of $222,667 and sourcing 33.3% of their deals from other landlords.