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

In Spartanburg County, landlords collectively own 19,981 Single Family Residential (SFR) properties, representing 18.6% of the total 107,480 SFR properties in the market. This substantial share highlights the significant presence of investor activity within the local housing landscape.

Individual landlords remain the dominant force in SFR ownership, holding 15,134 properties (75.7% of the investor-owned portfolio), significantly outnumbering company-owned properties at 5,143 (25.7%). This challenges the narrative of corporate dominance, showing the market is primarily driven by smaller, independent owners.

The vast majority of landlord-owned properties, 19,543 (97.8%), are designated as rented, confirming that the investor portfolio is overwhelmingly focused on generating rental income. This high percentage underscores the role of these properties in providing housing supply for the rental market in Spartanburg County.

A striking 77.3% of investor-owned properties, totaling 15,440, were acquired through cash transactions, indicating a strong preference for unencumbered assets and financial stability among landlords. Conversely, only 4,541 properties (22.7%) are financed, suggesting a lower reliance on mortgage debt for their holdings.

The market structure is heavily skewed towards individual landlords, with 17,673 distinct entities compared to just 2,192 company landlords. This 8.06:1 ratio demonstrates that the backbone of the rental market is composed of numerous smaller, individual investors rather than a few large corporate entities.

In the 2025-Q4, landlords in Spartanburg County demonstrated a significant pricing advantage, acquiring properties for an average of $197,530. This represents a substantial $142,367 discount, or 41.9% less than the average price paid by traditional homeowners, who purchased at $339,897.

The landlord pricing advantage has shown a notable trend of widening throughout 2025. Starting with a 29.0% discount ($96,508) in Q2, the gap expanded to 38.7% ($134,035) in Q3, and further to 41.9% ($142,367) in Q4. This indicates an increasing ability for landlords to secure properties at more favorable prices relative to owner-occupants.

Across all quarters of 2025, landlords consistently paid significantly less than homeowners. In Q1, the discount was 33.7% ($110,986), followed by 29.0% in Q2, 38.7% in Q3, and peaking at 41.9% in Q4. This sustained trend points to a systemic difference in acquisition strategies or market access for investor buyers.

The deepening discount secured by landlords suggests potential shifts in market dynamics where investors are either targeting different property segments, leveraging distressed sales, or benefiting from a more efficient buying process. This consistent price differential challenges the notion of a uniform market price for all buyer types.

While direct acquisition volume for specific quarters in 2025 is not detailed (showing 0 properties purchased in those periods in the raw data for section6-1), the robust pricing data from section6-2 provides a clear picture of the comparative cost advantage landlords hold when transacting in Spartanburg County.

Landlords in Spartanburg County captured a significant portion of the housing market in Q4 2025, purchasing 242 SFR properties. This accounted for 23.3% of the total 1,039 SFR purchases made during the quarter, demonstrating a substantial investor presence.

Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) were the driving force behind investor activity, acquiring 224 properties, which constitutes a dominant 89.2% of all landlord purchases in Q4. This far outweighs the activity of institutional investors (Tier 09), who purchased only 5 properties, representing a mere 2.0% share.

The single-property landlord tier (Tier 01) exhibited the highest level of purchasing activity, with 141 properties acquired, making up 56.2% of all landlord purchases. This high concentration in Tier 01, involving 188 distinct entities, signals a robust influx of new, small-scale investors entering the market.

A closer look at entities per property reveals varying buying intensities. While 188 entities in Tier 01 accounted for 141 properties, institutional investors (Tier 09) saw 2 entities acquire 5 properties, averaging 2.5 properties per entity. This indicates that even in their limited activity, institutional players made more substantial individual acquisitions than many smaller tiers.

The combined activity of small-medium landlords (Tiers 05-08) resulted in 22 properties purchased, accounting for 8.8% of landlord acquisitions, showing a modest contribution compared to the overwhelming mom-and-pop segment. Overall, Q4 highlights the fragmented and small-investor-dominated nature of the Spartanburg County rental market.

The distribution of investor-owned SFR properties in Spartanburg County reveals an overwhelming dominance by smaller landlords. Mom-and-pop investors (Tiers 01-04), those owning between 1 and 10 properties, collectively control 86.8% of the market.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) are the largest segment, holding 12,929 properties, which accounts for 62.7% of all investor-owned housing. This signifies that first-time or casual landlords are the backbone of the rental supply in the county, rather than large-scale portfolio holders.

In stark contrast to the mom-and-pop segment, institutional investors (Tier 09), defined as those owning 1000 or more properties, have a relatively minor presence, controlling only 629 properties or 3.1% of the total investor-owned portfolio. This refutes the common perception of widespread corporate control in this specific market.

The mid-size landlord tiers (05-08), encompassing owners with 11 to 1000 properties, collectively manage 2,086 properties, representing 10.1% of the market. This segment acts as a bridge between the vast number of small landlords and the few institutional players, contributing to market diversity.

The highly fragmented ownership structure, with most properties held by individuals with smaller portfolios, suggests a resilient and locally-driven rental market. This distribution indicates that investment decisions are often localized, potentially leading to varied management and pricing strategies across the county.

The distribution of individual versus company ownership in Spartanburg County reveals a clear pattern: individual investors overwhelmingly dominate the smaller portfolio tiers. For single-property landlords (Tier 01), individuals account for a vast 90.8% of properties (11,922 properties), while companies hold a mere 9.2% (1,206 properties).

This individual dominance continues through the two-property (Tier 02) and small landlord (3-5 properties, Tier 03-05) tiers, where individuals own 78.6% (1,453 properties) and 72.5% (1,576 properties) respectively. This illustrates that the entry point into the investment market is overwhelmingly via individual, rather than corporate, ventures.

A significant crossover point occurs in the 6-10 property tier (Tier 04), where company ownership surpasses individual ownership for the first time. Companies hold 508 properties (52.4%), slightly outnumbering the 461 properties (47.6%) owned by individuals in this segment, marking a pivotal shift in market structure.

As portfolio sizes increase, company ownership becomes progressively more concentrated. In the small-medium (11-20 properties, Tier 05-08) tier, companies own 486 properties (77.6%), while individuals hold only 140 properties (22.4%). This trend culminates in the 21-50 property tier, where companies control an overwhelming 85.8% (488 properties) of properties.

The data clearly outlines a two-tiered market based on owner type and portfolio size: a broad base of individual investors managing small portfolios, and a more concentrated segment of company investors managing medium to larger portfolios. This structural divergence informs different investment strategies and market impacts by owner type.

Within Spartanburg County, specific zip codes serve as hotspots for investor-owned SFR properties. The 29301 zip code leads with 2,143 investor-owned properties, followed closely by 29303 with 1,847 properties and 29349 with 1,744 properties. These regions represent the highest concentration of landlord portfolios by volume.

While some zip codes lead in sheer volume, others demonstrate an exceptionally high rate of investor penetration. Zip code 29615 records a striking 100.0% investor ownership rate, suggesting a specialized or limited market fully comprised of rental properties. Following closely are 29333 at 87.2% and 29377 at 85.6% investor-owned.

There is a clear distinction between regions with high counts of investor properties and those with high ownership percentages. For example, 29349, a top-count region, has an investor ownership rate of 13.8%, which is considerably lower than percentage leaders like 29615. This indicates that high-count areas are typically larger markets with more total SFR properties, while high-percentage areas represent highly concentrated, potentially smaller, investment zones.

The top 5 regions by investor-owned property count (29301, 29303, 29349, 29651, 29306) collectively account for 8,652 properties. These areas, with ownership rates ranging from 13.8% to 28.6%, highlight key strategic locations for large-scale rental operations or widespread individual investments within the county.

The extreme investor ownership rates in zip codes like 29615 (100.0%), 29333 (87.2%), and 29377 (85.6%) could signify areas with particular housing stock, demographics, or economic conditions that are uniquely attractive to investors. These micro-markets are essentially rental-dominated and offer distinct opportunities and challenges compared to more balanced regions.

Landlords in Spartanburg County consistently remained net buyers throughout 2024 and 2025. In Q4 2025, they purchased 323 properties and sold 104, resulting in a net acquisition of 219 properties. For the full year 2025, landlords achieved a net gain of 1,016 properties (1,448 buys vs. 432 sells), underscoring a persistent accumulation strategy.

The overall landlord buy-to-sell ratio has shown a gradual moderation, decreasing from 4.30x in 2024 (1,621 buys vs. 377 sells) to 3.35x for the full year 2025, and further to 3.11x in Q4 2025. While still firmly in a net buyer position, this trend suggests a slight slowdown in the pace of net acquisitions compared to previous periods.

In stark contrast to the broader landlord market, institutional investors (1000+ properties tier) exhibited a shift towards divestment. In Q4 2025, they were net sellers, selling 6 properties while only buying 5, resulting in a net reduction of 1 property. This trend is consistent with their full-year 2025 performance, where they were net sellers by 7 properties (15 buys vs. 22 sells).

The divergent transaction patterns between overall landlords and institutional players suggest different responses to market conditions. While smaller landlords continue to see opportunities for portfolio expansion, larger institutional entities appear to be strategically trimming their holdings, potentially optimizing portfolios or taking profits.

Over the past year, institutional investors' activity has been volatile; after being slight net buyers in 2024 (10 buys vs. 9 sells), they transitioned to a net seller position in 2025. This indicates a more dynamic and potentially opportunistic approach to market cycles by large-scale investors compared to the more consistent growth trajectory of the aggregate landlord market.

Landlords were actively engaged in the Spartanburg County housing market during Q4 2025, accounting for 323 transactions, which represents 20.6% of the total 1,570 SFR transactions. This indicates a consistent and notable presence of investor activity within the broader real estate market.

Transaction volumes varied significantly across investor tiers, with single-property landlords (Tier 01) leading the pack at 190 transactions. This reinforces their role as the most active segment, consistent with their overall dominance in market ownership. Mid-size tiers showed limited activity, with some institutional tiers having as few as 2-5 transactions.

A notable price disparity exists among investor tiers: single-property buyers (Tier 01) paid an average of $210,072, while institutional investors (Tier 09) secured properties at a much lower average price of $122,213. This represents a 41.8% discount for institutional players compared to the average price paid by Tier 01 investors.

The highest average purchase price was observed in the two-property landlord tier (Tier 02) at $230,883, while the small landlord tier (6-10 properties) acquired properties at the lowest average price of $106,461. This wide price range of $124,422 across tiers suggests diversified buying strategies and property preferences among different investor segments.

Inter-landlord trading activity was highest among small landlords (Tier 03-05), where 25.5% of their 55 transactions were sourced from other landlords. In contrast, larger institutional tiers (51-100, 101-1000, 1000+) recorded 0.0% of their Q4 transactions originating from other landlords, indicating they primarily acquire from non-investor sellers.