Sullivan (TN) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

Sullivan County's real estate market demonstrates robust landlord participation, with 9,920 SFR properties, representing 17.8% of the total 55,592 SFR properties. This highlights a significant investor presence contributing to the local housing supply.

Individual landlords form the predominant force in Sullivan County's investor market, owning 8,624 SFR properties, which constitutes a dominant 86.9% of all investor-owned SFR. This significantly overshadows company holdings of 1,406 properties, representing only 14.2%.

The prevalence of individual landlords is even more pronounced when examining entity counts, with 10,389 individual landlords compared to just 848 company landlords, reflecting a ratio of over 12:1. This challenges widespread narratives of corporate dominance in the local rental market.

A substantial 97.8% of landlord-owned properties in Sullivan County, totaling 9,701 units, are actively rented, underscoring the rental-focused nature of investor portfolios. This indicates a strong commitment to providing rental housing solutions within the community.

The majority of landlord acquisitions, totaling 7,817 properties or 78.8% of the portfolio, are cash purchases. This suggests a strong preference for unfinanced assets and financial stability among investors in Sullivan County, with only 2,103 properties (21.2%) being financed.

In Q4 2025, landlords in Sullivan County demonstrated superior buying power, acquiring properties at an average price of $211,173. This represents a substantial $102,962 discount, or 32.8% less, compared to traditional homeowners who paid $314,135 on average.

The price gap between landlords and homeowners has fluctuated significantly throughout 2025. In Q1, landlords secured a modest 6.8% discount ($21,178). However, this advantage expanded dramatically, reaching 31.7% in Q2 and stabilizing around 32-34% for Q3 and Q4, with discounts of $105,249 and $110,078 respectively.

The widening price gap suggests that landlords are increasingly effective at finding and securing properties below market value, particularly in the latter half of 2025. This may be attributed to savvy negotiation, access to distressed sales, or off-market opportunities.

Landlords consistently outpace traditional homeowners in price efficiency, maintaining a substantial discount that grew consistently from Q1 to Q2 and remained robust through Q4 2025. This sustained advantage highlights a structural difference in acquisition strategies and market access.

The average acquisition price for landlords in Q4 2025 ($211,173) is notably lower than in Q1 ($289,796), while homeowner prices have remained relatively stable ($310,974 in Q1 to $314,135 in Q4). This divergence further contributes to the widening and sustained discount observed for investors.

Landlords were significant players in Sullivan County's Q4 2025 market, accounting for 173 distinct SFR purchases, which represents a substantial 26.1% of the total 664 SFR properties transacted. This indicates a strong and consistent investor appetite for rental housing.

The overwhelming majority of landlord purchasing activity stemmed from mom-and-pop investors (Tiers 01-04), who acquired 158 properties, making up an impressive 84.9% of all landlord purchases in Q4. This underscores their continued and dominant influence in market expansion.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) were the most active segment within the investor market, purchasing 112 properties, or 60.2% of all landlord acquisitions. This highlights the ongoing entry and expansion of small-scale investors into the market, with 158 distinct entities making these purchases.

In stark contrast to smaller investors, institutional investors (Tier 09) played a minimal role in Q4 purchases, acquiring only 5 properties, which accounts for a mere 2.7% of all landlord acquisitions. This suggests a muted or selective presence for large-scale players in Sullivan County's current buying cycle.

The buying activity remains highly fragmented, with 158 entities from Tier 01 alone contributing to the 112 properties purchased. This indicates that a broad base of smaller, individual investors continues to drive the majority of Q4 acquisitions, rather than a few large entities.

The investor-owned SFR market in Sullivan County is overwhelmingly dominated by small-scale landlords, with mom-and-pop investors (Tiers 01-04) collectively controlling an impressive 95.0% of all landlord-owned properties. This totals 9,702 properties, underscoring their foundational role in the rental housing supply.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) alone represent the largest individual segment, owning 7,632 properties, which accounts for 74.7% of the total investor portfolio. This concentration in the smallest tier emphasizes the prevalence of first-time or minimal investors in the region.

Despite ongoing national narratives about corporate landlords, institutional investors (Tier 09, 1000+ properties) hold a negligible share in Sullivan County, owning just 9 properties, which equates to a mere 0.1% of the total landlord-owned SFR market. This indicates a largely un-institutionalized rental sector.

The distribution across tiers clearly shows a steep decline in property counts as portfolio size increases. For example, Tier 01 (7,632 properties) drastically dwarfs Tier 08 (101-1000 properties) with only 15 properties, indicating that larger-scale investment models are minimally present.

The structure of investor ownership in Sullivan County strongly favors individual and small-scale operations, with over 95% of the market in the hands of landlords managing 10 or fewer properties. This highly fragmented market contrasts sharply with regions experiencing significant institutional concentration.

Individual investors overwhelmingly dominate the smaller portfolio tiers in Sullivan County, holding 93.0% of single-property (Tier 01) SFRs and 80.1% of two-property (Tier 02) portfolios. This firmly establishes individual ownership as the foundation of the market's entry points.

The transition from individual to company majority ownership occurs clearly between the 11-20 and 21-50 property tiers. While individuals still hold a slight majority in the 11-20 tier at 52.0%, companies assume a commanding 80.5% majority in the 21-50 property tier, marking a significant crossover point.

Company ownership concentration significantly increases with portfolio size. For instance, companies hold only 7.0% of Tier 01 properties but climb to 48.0% in the 11-20 property tier, signaling their preference for, or ability to scale into, larger-scale operations.

Tier 21-50 exhibits the highest company concentration listed, with 124 properties (80.5%) being company-owned compared to just 30 individual-owned properties. This clearly defines the segment where corporate investment becomes the primary ownership model in Sullivan County.

Conversely, Tier 01 demonstrates the strongest individual investor concentration, with 7,164 properties (93.0%) owned by individuals. This confirms that the vast majority of small-scale landlords, particularly those just entering the market, operate as individuals rather than formal entities.

Within Sullivan County, Zip Code 37620 emerges as a primary hub for investor activity, housing 2,667 landlord-owned SFR properties. This represents a substantial 20.3% of the total SFR properties in that area, marking it as a key investment hotspot for rental housing.

Following closely, Zip Code 37660 also demonstrates strong investor presence, with 2,427 investor-owned SFR properties and a notable ownership rate of 19.4%. Together, 37620 and 37660 account for a significant portion of the county's investor-owned housing.

While Zip Code 37620 leads in raw property count, Zip Code 37665 exhibits the highest concentration of investor ownership by percentage, with an impressive 25.3% of its SFR properties being landlord-owned. This indicates a deeply penetrated market for rental housing in this specific area.

There is a clear correlation between areas with high investor property counts and high investor ownership rates in Sullivan County, as Zip Codes 37620 and 37660 feature prominently in both top lists. This suggests that large volumes of investor properties translate into a higher percentage of the local housing stock being rentals.

The geographic distribution highlights specific hotbeds for real estate investment within Sullivan County's zip codes. Investors are strategically targeting these particular areas for their acquisitions and rental operations, likely driven by localized market dynamics, property availability, and demand.

Landlords in Sullivan County are actively expanding their portfolios, consistently acting as net buyers throughout 2025. In Q4, they completed 247 buy transactions against 84 sell transactions, resulting in a strong buy/sell ratio of 2.94x and a net gain of 163 properties.

This sustained net-buyer trend is evident across the year, with landlords acquiring a total of 805 properties and selling 267 in 2025, for an annual buy/sell ratio of 3.01x. This indicates a deliberate, long-term accumulation strategy within the market.

Quarterly data for 2025 consistently shows net buying behavior: Q2 had a 3.07x ratio (209 buys vs 68 sells), and Q3 peaked at 3.59x (201 buys vs 56 sells). This demonstrates a persistent and strong demand from landlords to acquire more properties than they divest.

Institutional investors (1000+ properties) also maintained a net buyer position in Q4 2025, with 5 buys and 4 sells, resulting in a 1.25x buy/sell ratio. This suggests a cautious, but still positive, accumulation by larger players in the Sullivan County market.

While both overall landlords and institutional investors are net buyers, institutional activity is far more restrained, with a lower buy/sell ratio compared to the aggregate landlord market. This disparity indicates distinct strategies or varying capacities for rapid expansion between investor types.

Landlords were significant participants in Sullivan County's Q4 transaction volume, accounting for 247 of the total 1,083 SFR transactions, representing 22.8% of the market activity. This confirms their active and consistent role in the local housing economy.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) drove the majority of Q4 landlord transactions with 158 deals, demonstrating their high level of activity in property acquisition. Overall, mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) accounted for 216 transactions, or 87.4% of all landlord transactions, reinforcing their market dominance.

A notable pricing disparity exists between investor tiers: institutional investors (Tier 09) acquired properties at an average of $144,847, which is 37.2% less than the $230,715 paid by single-property landlords (Tier 01). This indicates larger investors leverage significant cost advantages, potentially through bulk purchasing or specialized sourcing.

Institutional investors (Tier 09) exhibited the highest propensity for inter-landlord transactions in Q4, with 40.0% of their 5 purchases coming from other landlords. This suggests a strategic acquisition approach, often trading properties within the existing investor network rather than competing directly with traditional homeowners.

The average purchase prices vary considerably by tier, from a low of $121,701 for small-medium landlords (Tier 11-20) to a high of $285,986 for medium-large landlords (Tier 51-100). This wide range highlights diverse buying strategies and property types targeted by different investor sizes, with smaller landlords often paying more per unit.