Clay (NE) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

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

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Clay (NE)
1,811
Total Investors in Clay (NE)
973
Investor Owned SFR in Clay (NE)
694(38.3%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
909
SFR Owned
622
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
64
SFR Owned
79
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 694 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

Mom-and-pop investors dominate Clay County with 99.3% ownership, buying homes at a 33.8% discount.
Investors own 38.3% of Clay County's SFR market, with individuals holding 89.6% of the 694 properties. In Q4, landlords purchased 21.4% of homes sold, paying 33.8% less than homeowners, while operating as strong net buyers.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors own 694 SFRs in Clay County, with individual landlords holding 89.6%.
A strong cash position is evident, with 565 properties owned outright versus 129 financed. The portfolio is heavily rental-focused, as 690 of 694 properties are non-owner-occupied.
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
Clay County landlords secured a massive 33.8% discount compared to homeowners in Q4.
This Q4 discount of $55,978 represents a significant shift from Q2, when landlords paid a 19.3% premium. The average landlord purchase price in Q4 2025 was $109,460.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords purchased 21.4% of all SFR properties sold in Clay County in Q4.
Mom-and-pop landlords were responsible for 100% of these acquisitions. The market saw 4 new single-property landlords enter, while institutional investors made zero purchases.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords overwhelmingly control 99.3% of Clay County's investor-owned housing.
Single-property landlords alone own 85.6% of the portfolio (608 properties). In contrast, institutional investors own just 0.3%, holding only 2 properties in the county.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Companies become majority owners at the 6-10 property tier, despite individuals dominating overall.
Individuals own 93.0% of single-property portfolios and 78.3% of two-property portfolios. In the 6-10 property tier, companies own 14 properties (77.8%) compared to individuals' 4.
Geographic Distribution
Investor activity is highly concentrated in specific zip codes like 68944 and 68935.
The 68944 zip code has an investor ownership rate of 52.6% (169 properties). The 68935 zip code follows with a 47.2% rate (94 properties).
Historical Transactions
Clay County landlords are aggressive net buyers, acquiring 7.3 properties for every 1 they sold in 2025.
In 2025, landlords purchased 22 properties while selling only 3. In contrast, institutional investors were net neutral for the year, with 1 purchase and 1 sale.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlords were involved in 18.2% of all Clay County transactions in Q4 2025.
All 4 landlord transactions were by new, single-property investors, who paid an average of $109,460. None of these purchases were from other landlords, indicating acquisitions from the open market.

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 694 SFRs in Clay County, with individual landlords holding 89.6%.
Detailed Findings

Investors have a significant footprint in Clay County, owning 694 single-family residential properties, which constitutes a remarkable 38.3% of the total 1,811 SFRs in the market.

The market is overwhelmingly controlled by small-scale individual investors, who own 622 properties (89.6%), compared to just 79 properties (11.4%) held by companies.

This individual dominance is further reflected in the entity count, where 909 individual landlords operate in the market, outnumbering the 64 company landlords by more than 14 to 1.

Investors in Clay County demonstrate strong financial positioning, with cash purchases far outweighing financing; 565 properties (81.4%) are owned free-and-clear, while only 129 are financed.

The investor portfolio is almost entirely dedicated to rentals, with 690 of the 694 properties being non-owner-occupied, underscoring a clear strategy of providing housing for the rental market rather than speculation.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
Clay County landlords secured a massive 33.8% discount compared to homeowners in Q4.
Detailed Findings

In Q4 2025, investors in Clay County demonstrated exceptional purchasing power, acquiring properties for an average of $109,460, a staggering $55,978 (33.8%) less than the $165,438 paid by traditional homeowners.

This pricing advantage marks a dramatic reversal from earlier in the year. In Q2 2025, landlords paid a premium of 19.3% ($29,484) more than homeowners, highlighting significant volatility in purchasing dynamics within the local market.

The price gap has been inconsistent, narrowing from a 33.8% discount in Q4 to a 14.1% discount in Q3, suggesting that landlord negotiation power fluctuates significantly from quarter to quarter.

Long-term price appreciation for investor-acquired properties appears modest. The Q4 2025 average price of $109,460 is only slightly above the pandemic-era (2020-2023) average of $103,833.

The significant discount achieved in the most recent quarter suggests that local landlords are adept at identifying and capitalizing on undervalued properties, a key advantage in a competitive market.

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

Chart Section7 Purchases
Chart Section7 Tiers
Key Insight
Landlords purchased 21.4% of all SFR properties sold in Clay County in Q4.
Detailed Findings

Investors accounted for 21.4% of the single-family market activity in Q4 2025, purchasing 3 of the 14 total properties sold in Clay County.

The entirety of this Q4 investor activity was driven by the smallest players, with 100% of purchases (3 properties) made by mom-and-pop landlords operating in the 1-10 property tiers.

Market growth is exclusively at the entry level, as all 3 properties were acquired by new, single-property landlords. These transactions represent the entry of 4 new landlord entities into the Clay County market.

In stark contrast to the activity from small investors, institutional investors (1000+ properties) were completely inactive, making zero purchases in Q4 2025.

This data confirms that the current investor landscape in Clay County is being shaped entirely by new and existing small-scale landlords, not by large corporations.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords overwhelmingly control 99.3% of Clay County's investor-owned housing.
Detailed Findings

The investor market in Clay County is unequivocally dominated by small-scale operators, with mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) owning 99.3% of all investor-held SFRs.

First-time and single-property investors form the bedrock of the market, with the 'Tier 01' category alone accounting for 608 properties, an incredible 85.6% of the total investor portfolio.

The presence of large-scale investors is negligible. Institutional firms (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) own a mere 2 properties, representing just 0.3% of the investor market share.

Combined, mid-size and large investors (Tiers 05-08) are also a minor factor, collectively owning only 3 properties in the entire county.

This distribution reveals a highly decentralized ownership structure, where market dynamics are dictated by hundreds of individual landlords rather than a handful of large corporations.

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
Companies become majority owners at the 6-10 property tier, despite individuals dominating overall.
Detailed Findings

While individual investors dominate the Clay County market overall (89.6% of properties), a clear crossover point emerges as portfolios grow. Companies become the majority owners in the 6-10 property tier, holding 14 of the 18 properties (77.8%).

Individual ownership is most concentrated at the entry level of the market. Individuals own 571 of the 608 single-property investor homes (93.0%) and 47 of the 60 two-property portfolios (78.3%).

This pattern indicates that while individuals are more likely to enter the market and own one or two rentals, corporate structures are favored for scaling portfolios beyond five properties.

Even with this crossover, the total number of company-owned properties remains small, with just 79 in the county, reinforcing the individual-driven nature of the local market.

The data suggests two distinct investor paths in Clay County: a broad base of individuals with small portfolios and a small niche of companies managing slightly larger, but still modest, collections of properties.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor activity is highly concentrated in specific zip codes like 68944 and 68935.
Detailed Findings

Investor ownership in Clay County is not evenly distributed, showing intense concentration in specific zip codes. The 68944 area leads with 169 investor-owned properties, representing a majority 52.6% of its SFR housing stock.

Similarly, the 68935 zip code exhibits a high density of investor activity, with 94 properties owned by investors, accounting for 47.2% of the local market.

Two other zip codes, 68938 and 68941, also show significant investor presence, with ownership rates of 31.4% and 44.5% respectively.

This geographic clustering indicates that investors are targeting specific neighborhoods or communities within Clay County, rather than spreading their acquisitions uniformly.

The extremely high penetration rates in these top zip codes suggest that over half of the single-family homes in certain parts of the county are serving as rental properties.

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
Chart Section11 Institutional
Chart Section11 Institutional Price
Key Insight
Clay County landlords are aggressive net buyers, acquiring 7.3 properties for every 1 they sold in 2025.
Detailed Findings

Landlords in Clay County are in a strong accumulation phase, consistently operating as net buyers. In 2025, they purchased 22 SFR properties while only selling 3, a buy-to-sell ratio of over 7-to-1.

This net buyer trend was consistent throughout the year, with a net gain of 3 properties in Q4 (4 buys, 1 sell), 9 in Q3 (10 buys, 1 sell), and 5 in Q2 (6 buys, 1 sell).

The pattern extends back to 2024, when landlords also ended the year as net buyers with 13 purchases against 5 sales, demonstrating a multi-year trend of portfolio growth.

Institutional investors (1000+ tier) are not contributing to this growth. Their activity in 2025 was perfectly balanced with one purchase and one sale, indicating a stable or neutral position in the market.

The data clearly shows that the expansion of investor ownership in Clay County is being driven entirely by small and mid-sized landlords actively increasing their holdings.

Current Quarter Transactions

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

Key Insight
Landlords were involved in 18.2% of all Clay County transactions in Q4 2025.
Detailed Findings

Investor activity comprised 18.2% of the market's total transaction volume in Q4 2025, with landlords participating in 4 of the 22 total SFR sales.

The Q4 acquisition market was exclusively driven by new entrants, as all 4 investor purchases were made by single-property (Tier 01) landlords.

These new investors purchased properties at an average price of $109,460, securing the significant discount seen across the broader landlord category compared to homeowners.

There was no inter-landlord trading activity during the quarter; 0% of the properties purchased by investors were acquired from other landlords, suggesting they are sourcing inventory from traditional homeowners or new construction.

With zero transactions from institutional or even mid-sized investors, the data highlights that the transactional heartbeat of Clay County's investor market lies with individuals making their first rental property purchase.

Chart Section12 Transactions
Chart Section12 Prices
Chart Section12 Prices Detail

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

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Executive Summary

Mom-and-pop investors dominate Clay County with 99.3% ownership, buying homes at a 33.8% discount.
Holdings
Investors own 694 single-family properties in Clay County, a significant 38.3% of the total market, with individual investors overwhelmingly holding 622 of these homes (89.6%).
Pricing
In Q4 2025, landlords paid an average of $109,460, securing a massive 33.8% discount compared to traditional homeowners, who paid an average of $165,438.
Activity
Landlords acquired 21.4% of all homes sold in Q4 (3 properties), with activity driven exclusively by 4 new single-property landlords entering the market.
Market Share
Small mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control 99.3% of all investor-owned housing, while institutional investors have a negligible presence with just 0.3% share.
Ownership Type
Individual investors own the vast majority of small portfolios, with companies only achieving majority ownership in the 6-10 property tier, a clear crossover point for scaling.
Transactions
Landlords are strong net buyers, with 4 purchases for every 1 sale in Q4, while the county's two institutional properties saw no net change in 2025.
Market Narrative

The single-family rental market in Clay County, Nebraska is characterized by an exceptionally high level of local, small-scale ownership. Investors own 694 properties, a staggering 38.3% of the county's entire single-family housing stock. This market is overwhelmingly composed of individual investors, who own 89.6% of these homes. The ownership structure is highly decentralized, with mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) controlling 99.3% of the investor portfolio, while institutional firms are virtually non-existent with a mere 0.3% share.

Investor behavior in Q4 2025 was defined by strategic acquisitions and strong net growth. Landlords purchased 21.4% of all homes sold, with all activity coming from new, single-property investors. These buyers demonstrated remarkable deal-finding ability, paying an average of $109,460—a 33.8% discount compared to traditional homeowners. Overall, landlords are in a strong accumulation phase, operating as net buyers with a 4-to-1 buy/sell ratio in the last quarter, signaling continued confidence in the local rental market.

The key takeaway for Clay County is that its rental housing market is not driven by Wall Street, but by local individuals. The high investor penetration, particularly in zip codes like 68944 where over half the homes are investor-owned, indicates a market heavily reliant on rentals. The market's health and stability are therefore tied to the financial well-being of hundreds of small landlords, whose continued investment is shaping housing availability and affordability across the county.

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 19, 2026 at 02:50 AM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyClay (NE)
×
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 Section7 Purchases
Chart Section7 Purchases
×
Chart Section7 Tiers
Chart Section7 Tiers
×
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