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

Individual investors overwhelmingly dominate the SFR rental market in Union County, SC, controlling 1,828 properties, which accounts for 88.0% of all landlord-owned SFR. Companies, in contrast, hold a smaller share with 251 properties or 12.1% of the total investor portfolio.

The landlord-owned portfolio comprises 2,077 SFR properties, representing a significant 23.6% of the county's total SFR market of 8,818 properties. This high penetration underscores the substantial presence of investors in the local housing landscape.

Union County landlords show a strong reliance on cash acquisitions, with 2,030 properties acquired without financing compared to only 47 financed properties. This pattern suggests a preference for debt-free ownership or a market where cash offers are highly competitive.

With 2,006 properties identified as rented, approximately 96.6% of the landlord-owned portfolio is dedicated to rental income generation. This high proportion highlights the clear rental focus of investors in the county.

There is a stark numerical difference in entities, with 1,545 individual landlords compared to just 152 company landlords. This 10.16-to-1 ratio further reinforces the market's foundation on individual, smaller-scale investors rather than corporate entities.

In Q4 2025, landlords in Union County demonstrated a clear pricing advantage, acquiring properties for an average of $170,000. This represents a $27,231 discount, or 13.8% less, than the average $197,231 paid by traditional homeowners.

The landlord pricing advantage has varied significantly throughout 2025, signaling dynamic market conditions. The largest discount occurred in Q2, where landlords paid $99,900, a remarkable 47.3% ($89,504) less than homeowners' $189,404.

Recent landlord acquisition activity has been notably subdued, with zero properties reported purchased across several timeframes in both 2024 and 2025. This suggests a period of caution or limited opportunities for new investments among landlords.

Comparing Q4's 13.8% discount to Q3's 38.9% ($78,282 discount on $201,056 homeowner price), the price gap narrowed considerably towards the end of 2025. This suggests either increasing competition for properties or a shift in the types of properties being acquired.

Despite the overall low volume of acquisitions, the consistent landlord discount across 2025 quarters (13.8% to 47.3%) highlights investors' ability to secure favorable pricing compared to the general market, potentially through distressed sales or off-market transactions.

Landlords significantly contributed to Union County's Q4 2025 housing market, responsible for 5 out of 19 total SFR purchases, equating to 26.3% of all sales. This indicates a notable, though not majority, share of recent acquisition activity by investors.

Mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) were the primary drivers of investor activity, making 4 purchases which constituted 80.0% of all landlord acquisitions in Q4 2025. This highlights their continued prominence in local market transactions.

The single-property tier (Tier 01) was particularly active, with 3 entities acquiring 3 properties, representing 60.0% of all landlord purchases during the quarter. This signals a healthy influx of new or expanding small-scale landlords into the market.

Institutional investors (Tier 09) also participated in Q4, with one entity acquiring 1 property. While a small volume, this indicates some level of large-scale investor interest, though significantly less than smaller landlords.

The concentration of Q4 purchases in the mom-and-pop segment (Tiers 01-04) at 80.0% contrasts sharply with the smaller institutional activity, reinforcing the notion that local, smaller investors are the dominant force in current buying trends.

Mom-and-pop landlords, encompassing portfolios from 1 to 10 properties (Tiers 01-04), collectively own an overwhelming 91.3% of all investor-held SFR properties in Union County. This demonstrates their foundational role in the local rental housing market.

The single-property landlord tier (Tier 01) represents the dominant segment, with 1,398 properties accounting for 67.0% of the entire investor-owned SFR portfolio. This highlights the widespread prevalence of first-time or small-scale investors.

In stark contrast, institutional investors (Tier 09), defined as owning 1000+ properties, hold a negligible share of the market, with only 5 properties representing 0.2% of investor-owned SFR. This significantly undercuts common narratives about corporate housing dominance in this county.

Medium-sized landlords (Tiers 05-08, 11-1000 properties) collectively own 8.4% of the market (3.1% for 11-20, 4.7% for 21-50, 0.5% for 51-100, 0.1% for 101-1000 properties). This shows a fragmented distribution beyond the mom-and-pop segment, with no single mid-tier dominating.

The concentration of ownership clearly signals a market primarily shaped by individual, small-scale entrepreneurs rather than large corporate entities, defining Union County's investor landscape as highly localized and accessible.

Individual investors overwhelmingly dominate ownership across all detailed portfolio tiers in Union County, from single-property holdings to the 'Small-medium (21-50)' tier. For instance, single-property investors are 93.9% individual (1,315 properties) versus 6.1% company (85 properties).

No clear crossover point where companies become the majority owners is evident within the provided data, as individuals maintain a strong majority even in larger segments. In the 'Small-medium (11-20)' tier, individual owners still comprise 60.0% (39 properties) compared to companies' 40.0% (26 properties).

As portfolio size increases, companies do incrementally gain a larger percentage of ownership, indicating a trend towards corporate involvement in larger-scale investing. However, this trend does not translate to majority control in any of the detailed tiers.

In the 'Small landlord (6-10)' tier, individuals own 62.5% (80 properties) while companies hold 37.5% (48 properties), demonstrating that the vast majority of medium-sized portfolios are also under individual management.

The data clearly illustrates that the local investor market is largely driven by individual entrepreneurship, even as portfolio sizes grow, challenging assumptions about pervasive corporate takeover of rental housing.

Investor-owned properties in Union County are heavily concentrated in specific zip codes, most notably SC-Union-29379, which accounts for 1,361 properties. This single zip code represents approximately 65.5% of the county's total 2,077 investor-owned SFR.

While SC-Union-29379 leads by property count, SC-Union-29364 demonstrates the highest investor penetration rate at 45.0%, owning 113 properties. This indicates a high proportion of investor activity relative to the total SFR inventory in that particular area.

The zip code SC-Union-29353 follows with 240 investor-owned properties and a 20.9% ownership rate, further contributing to localized pockets of investor activity within the county. SC-Union-29321 also shows a significant presence with 204 properties at a 23.6% ownership rate.

A comparison between the top regions by count and by percentage reveals distinct investment patterns. For example, SC-Union-29364 has a high ownership rate (45.0%) but a lower property count (113), while SC-Union-29379 has a lower rate (23.3%) but a much higher count (1,361). This suggests different market strategies or property availabilities in these areas.

The pronounced geographic clustering highlights that investor activity is not uniformly distributed across Union County but rather focused on specific local markets, likely driven by factors like affordability, rental demand, or property availability within those zip codes.

Landlords in Union County are consistently net buyers of SFR properties, evidenced by 5 buys versus 2 sells in Q4 2025, yielding a 2.5x buy/sell ratio. This sustained purchasing activity indicates continued confidence and expansion within the market.

Looking at the broader trend, landlords for the entirety of 2025 (Year 2025) executed 32 purchases against 13 sales, resulting in a net acquisition of 19 properties and a strong 2.46x buy/sell ratio. This signals a strategic accumulation of assets throughout the year.

Institutional investors (1000+ tier) displayed a neutral transaction pattern in 2024, with 2 buys and 2 sells, resulting in no net change to their portfolio. This suggests a period of stable holdings rather than aggressive expansion or divestment for larger entities.

The increase in the buy/sell ratio from 1.35x in Year 2024 (27 buys vs 20 sells) to 2.46x in Year 2025 demonstrates a significant acceleration in net buying activity by landlords. This trend signals a strengthening market for investor acquisitions.

Across Q2, Q3, and Q4 of 2025, landlords consistently remained net buyers, making 7 buys versus 5 sells (Q2) and 10 buys versus 4 sells (Q3). This quarterly consistency reinforces the overall growth-oriented strategy of local investors.

In Q4 2025, landlords were involved in 5 transactions, making up 19.2% of the total 26 SFR transactions in Union County. This indicates a consistent, albeit minority, presence in the broader sales market.

Mom-and-pop landlords (Tier 01-04) were responsible for 4 out of the 5 landlord transactions, reaffirming their primary role in local market activity. Single-property landlords (Tier 01) executed 3 transactions, demonstrating their active participation.

A striking price differential emerged, with institutional investors (Tier 09) acquiring properties at an average price of $30,000 in Q4. This is an extraordinary 87.5% less than the $240,000 average price paid by single-property landlords (Tier 01).

Interestingly, none of the Q4 landlord purchases originated from other landlords (0.0% bought from landlords), suggesting that investor acquisitions are primarily from traditional sellers rather than through inter-investor trades. This points to a healthy influx of new inventory into the landlord market.

The significant price disparity between institutional and single-property buyers in Q4 highlights distinct acquisition strategies, where larger investors may be targeting distressed assets or properties requiring substantial renovation to achieve such steep discounts.