Berkeley (SC) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

Landlords in Berkeley County collectively own 9,268 SFR properties, constituting a significant 12.3% of the county's total SFR market of 75,215 properties. This highlights a notable investor presence within the local housing landscape.

Individual investors lead the market by property count, holding 5,441 SFR properties, which accounts for 58.7% of all investor-owned units. Companies, meanwhile, own 3,957 properties, making up the remaining 42.7% of the landlord portfolio.

The investor market is primarily driven by individuals, with 6,779 distinct individual landlords compared to 1,139 company landlords. This signifies that individual investors are nearly six times more numerous, shaping the ownership dynamics significantly.

A strong rental focus is evident, as 9,004 of the 9,268 investor-owned properties are rented, representing 97.1% of the portfolio. This high percentage underscores that nearly all investor-owned SFRs are actively contributing to the rental housing supply in Berkeley County.

In terms of acquisition methods, 6,304 properties were acquired with cash, while 2,964 were financed. This indicates a preference for cash purchases, with cash acquisitions making up 68.0% of the investor-owned portfolio, potentially reducing financing risk.

Landlords in Berkeley County consistently secured significant discounts compared to traditional homeowners throughout 2025. In Q4 2025, landlords paid an average of $407,842, which was $44,139 or 9.8% less than the average homeowner price of $451,981.

The price gap between landlords and homeowners has fluctuated dramatically year-to-date, peaking at a substantial 31.7% discount in Q3 ($325,222 vs $476,102). This indicates varying market conditions or specific deal-making opportunities exploited by investors across quarters.

Comparing Q4's 9.8% discount to Q2's 14.4% ($397,961 vs $464,794) and Q1's 24.3% ($339,726 vs $448,486) reveals a narrowing of the pricing advantage for landlords in the most recent quarter, suggesting increased competition or a tighter market for discounted properties.

While specific acquisition volumes for landlords across 2024 and 2025 are not consistently provided in this section, the available pricing trends show that the average acquisition price for landlords has also varied, with the lowest average in Q3 2025 at $325,222 and the highest in Q4 2024 at $490,300, indicating market shifts.

The overall average acquisition price for landlords during 2020-2023 was $385,373. Comparing this to the average 2025 price of $369,770, suggests a slight decrease in landlord acquisition costs since the pandemic-era buying surge, despite quarterly fluctuations.

In Q4 2025, landlords in Berkeley County were responsible for 72 of the total 773 SFR purchases, representing 9.3% of the entire market's transaction volume. This indicates a consistent but not overwhelming share of recent buying activity by investors.

Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) were the primary drivers of investor purchases, acquiring 60 properties, which constitutes 83.3% of all landlord Q4 purchases. This highlights the crucial role smaller investors play in the local market's activity.

A significant influx of new individual investors was observed, with 58 entities entering the market by purchasing their first single-family property. These single-property landlords (Tier 01) alone accounted for 43 properties, or 56.6% of all landlord purchases this quarter.

In contrast to the mom-and-pop dominance, institutional investors (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) made a more modest impact in Q4, acquiring 6 properties, representing 8.3% of landlord purchases. This suggests a less aggressive acquisition stance from larger players in Berkeley County recently.

The average properties per entity varied by tier, with Tier 01 entities acquiring 43 properties across 58 entities (approximately 0.74 properties per entity, indicating distinct entities for single property acquisitions), while larger tiers show varying purchase intensity reflecting portfolio growth strategies.

Mom-and-pop landlords, encompassing Tiers 01-04 (1-10 properties), collectively own 6,648 SFR properties, which accounts for a commanding 71.7% of all investor-owned housing in Berkeley County. This demonstrates their foundational role in the local rental market.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) form the backbone of the investor market, holding 5,076 properties, representing 53.5% of the total investor-owned SFRs. This concentration in first-time or small-scale investors underscores a highly fragmented ownership landscape.

Despite media focus on large-scale players, institutional investors (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) control 1,522 properties, making up 16.4% of the investor-owned market. This positions them as a significant, but not dominant, force compared to the widespread mom-and-pop presence.

Mid-size landlords (Tiers 05-08, 11-1000 properties) collectively own 1,324 properties, representing 14.3% of the total investor-owned portfolio. This segment bridges the gap between the numerous small landlords and the fewer, larger institutional players.

The data provided for Berkeley County does not include specific tier acquisition prices across timeframes in this section, preventing direct comparison of how prices vary by investor size or how tier distribution has evolved over time in terms of acquisition cost trends.

Individual investors overwhelmingly dominate the smaller tiers of Berkeley County's SFR market, controlling 86.9% of single-property (Tier 01) holdings with 4,485 properties. This strong individual presence extends through the two-property (Tier 02) and small landlord (Tier 03-05) tiers, where they still hold 73.2% and 69.1% respectively.

A significant shift occurs at the 6-10 property tier (Tier 06-10), where companies become the majority owners, holding 58.2% of properties compared to individuals at 41.8%. This marks the crossover point where corporate investment strategies begin to prevail over individual efforts in portfolio expansion.

The dominance of company ownership intensifies in larger portfolios; for instance, in the small-medium tier (21-50 properties), companies own 89.0% of properties (292 properties) versus individuals at a mere 11.0% (36 properties). This trend highlights the structural advantage companies have in scaling their operations.

While individuals are integral to the entry-level market, companies demonstrate a clear capacity for aggregation and management of larger property portfolios. This segmented ownership structure suggests different operational models and investment capacities across owner types.

Specific pricing data by owner type within each tier is not provided in the current dataset, limiting the ability to analyze how individual versus company acquisition prices may differ across various portfolio sizes or their respective growth patterns over time.

Within Berkeley County, the zip code SC-Berkeley-29445 is the epicenter of investor activity, housing 2,409 landlord-owned properties. This significant concentration represents 13.6% of its total SFR market, making it the top region by sheer volume.

Following closely, SC-Berkeley-29486 and SC-Berkeley-29461 are also major hubs for investor-owned properties, with 2,011 and 1,746 units respectively. These top three zip codes collectively demonstrate a strong geographic clustering of investor portfolios within the county.

While volume leaders indicate where investors have bought the most, SC-Berkeley-29406 stands out with an astonishing 100.0% investor ownership rate. This signals a complete market capture by landlords in this specific, likely smaller, sub-geography, distinguishing it as a uniquely landlord-dominated area.

Other high-percentage investor-owned areas include SC-Berkeley-29059 (26.0% rate) and SC-Berkeley-29468 (19.5% rate), indicating specific pockets with high landlord penetration that may differ from the volume leaders. This implies varied investment strategies focusing on either high volume or high market share.

The current dataset does not provide acquisition prices by sub-geography, which would be crucial for understanding if investors pay premiums or discounts in these highly concentrated or high-rate areas compared to other parts of Berkeley County.

Overall, landlords in Berkeley County remain net buyers, consistently acquiring more properties than they sell. In Q4 2025, they bought 98 properties while selling 55, resulting in a net increase of 43 properties and a buy/sell ratio of 1.78x, sustaining market growth.

This net buyer trend is consistent across the entire year, with landlords making 387 purchases against 208 sales in 2025, yielding a 1.86x buy/sell ratio. Similarly, 2024 saw a robust 2.34x buy/sell ratio (915 buys vs 391 sells), indicating a sustained pattern of accumulation over recent years.

In stark contrast to the overall landlord market, institutional investors (1000+ properties) have been consistent net sellers. In Q4 2025, they sold 8 properties while buying only 6, resulting in a net reduction of 2 properties. This indicates a strategic shift towards divesting assets.

The institutional divestment trend extends throughout 2025, with 13 buys against 21 sells, resulting in a net decrease of 8 properties. This pattern became even more pronounced in 2024, where institutions only bought 1 property while selling 22, signaling a significant reduction in their Berkeley County portfolio.

Average buy and sell prices for all landlords across timeframes are not consistently provided in this section, preventing a detailed analysis of implied margins or changes in pricing strategy for transactions over time. However, the consistent net-buyer status for all landlords points to continued confidence in the market.

In Q4 2025, landlords in Berkeley County participated in 98 of the 1,199 total SFR transactions, representing an 8.2% share of all market activity. This confirms their active, but not dominant, presence in the quarterly transaction landscape.

Mom-and-pop landlords, specifically those in the single-property tier (Tier 01), demonstrated the highest average purchase price in Q4 at $429,548 across 59 transactions. This suggests that smaller investors might be acquiring properties at a premium or in more competitive market segments.

Conversely, institutional investors (Tier 09) secured properties at a significantly lower average price of $299,193 in Q4, representing a 30.3% discount compared to the average price paid by single-property landlords. This indicates a distinct purchasing strategy, likely focusing on different asset classes or distressed sales.

Inter-landlord trading activity varied across tiers; notably, small landlords in Tier 06-10 sourced 50.0% of their 2 Q4 transactions from other landlords. Single-property landlords (Tier 01) also engaged in inter-landlord trades, with 13 of their 59 transactions (22.0%) coming from other investors.

Institutional investors (Tier 09) completed 6 transactions in Q4, none of which were acquired from other landlords, signifying their reliance on non-landlord sellers. This contrasts with smaller tiers that show more intra-investor market liquidity for property exchanges.