Daggett (UT) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

The Daggett County housing market shows an extraordinary investor presence, with landlords owning 546 SFR properties, representing a substantial 81.1% of the total 673 SFR properties available. This indicates a market heavily dominated by rental investors.

Individual investors form the backbone of this market, controlling an overwhelming 96.9% (529 properties) of all investor-owned SFR, while company-owned properties constitute a smaller 13.6% (74 properties). This structure challenges perceptions of corporate dominance in this specific region.

The investor landscape is further solidified by the entity count, where individual landlords outnumber companies by a significant margin of 806 individuals to just 76 companies, a ratio of more than 10-to-1. This highlights the pervasive "mom-and-pop" nature of the market.

A striking characteristic of landlord holdings in Daggett County is the complete absence of financed properties, with all 546 investor-owned SFR properties acquired with cash. This points to a highly liquid and low-leverage investor market, relying solely on cash investments.

All 546 landlord-owned properties are classified as rented, indicating a 100% non-owner-occupied focus for investor portfolios in the region. This confirms that these properties are primarily held for generating consistent rental income, without any owner-occupancy by the investor.

Due to the absence of specific acquisition pricing data for Daggett County, UT, a detailed analysis of landlord versus homeowner acquisition costs cannot be performed. This prevents any insights into potential price advantages or disadvantages for landlords in this market.

Without quarterly or annual pricing information, it is impossible to assess trends in landlord acquisition prices over time, such as changes from the pandemic era (2020-2023) to the current Q4 2025. This limits our understanding of market appreciation or depreciation for investor properties.

The lack of data also precludes any comparison of acquisition prices between individual and company landlords, which would typically reveal differences in purchasing power or investment strategies based on entity type. Similarly, it is not possible to determine if any landlord discount is consistent, widening, or narrowing over time.

Consequently, the number of properties acquired in various timeframes and their associated average prices remain unknown, making it challenging to gauge acquisition velocity or investment activity based on price points for this region.

Daggett County experienced a complete standstill in the SFR housing market during Q4 2025, recording zero total SFR purchases. This indicates a profound pause in all acquisition activity by any type of buyer during this period.

Reflecting the overall market inactivity, landlords made no SFR purchases in Q4 2025, representing 0.0% of the market. This clearly signifies a complete cessation of investor expansion within the county for this quarter, with no new properties added to landlord portfolios.

Consequently, there was no purchase activity across any investor tier; both mom-and-pop landlords (Tier 01-04) and institutional investors (Tier 09) registered 0 purchases, each contributing 0.0% to landlord acquisitions. This uniform inactivity highlights a broader market freeze.

With zero transactions, it is impossible to identify any new landlords entering the market (Tier 01) or to analyze the activity concentration across different investor tiers for Q4 2025. The market appears entirely dormant in terms of new acquisitions, leaving no insights into recent growth or shifts in investor demographics.

The investor-owned housing market in Daggett County is overwhelmingly dominated by small-scale investors, with mom-and-pop landlords (Tiers 01-04) controlling a massive 99.8% of all investor-owned SFR properties. This translates to 569 properties held by these smaller entities, defining the market structure.

Specifically, single-property landlords (Tier 01) form the bedrock of this market, owning 503 properties, which alone accounts for 88.2% of the total investor-owned housing. This highlights the pervasive prevalence of first-time or very small-scale investors.

In stark contrast, institutional investors (Tier 09), those owning 1000+ properties, have a negligible footprint in Daggett County, holding only 1 property, representing a mere 0.2% of the investor-owned market. This strongly defies the common narrative of institutional control seen in many other regions.

Even the slightly larger mom-and-pop segments, such as two-property landlords (Tier 02) and those with 3-5 properties (Tier 03), contribute significantly less, holding 46 properties (8.1%) and 19 properties (3.3%) respectively. This shows a rapid decrease in property counts as portfolio size increases beyond a single property, reinforcing the small-investor focus.

The absence of tier-specific acquisition pricing data prevents an analysis of whether larger investors pay more or less than smaller ones, or how prices have evolved for different tiers over time. However, the current distribution clearly establishes a market structure heavily reliant on individual, small-scale investments.

Individual investors maintain a dominant presence across all specified tiers in Daggett County, significantly outpacing company ownership even within the entry-level segments. For single-property landlords (Tier 01), individuals own 483 properties, representing 87.3% of the tier’s total 553 properties, while companies hold a smaller share of 70 properties (12.7%).

This individual dominance becomes even more pronounced in the slightly larger two-property landlord tier (Tier 02), where individuals account for 93.8% of holdings (45 properties) compared to companies' 6.2% (3 properties) out of 48 properties. This indicates a consistent preference for individual ownership in smaller portfolios.

For small landlords owning 3-5 properties (Tier 03-05), individual ownership is absolute, with 19 properties owned entirely by individuals and no company-owned properties in this tier (0.0%). This highlights that companies are not expanding into this particular portfolio size in Daggett County.

Based on the available data for Tiers 01, 02, and 03-05, there is no discernible crossover point where company ownership becomes the majority. Individuals consistently hold the majority share, indicating a market structure fundamentally different from regions with significant corporate investment.

The data provided for this section does not include acquisition prices segmented by individual and company ownership within tiers, nor does it offer insights into growth patterns over time for different owner types. Therefore, a comparative analysis of pricing strategies or growth trajectories between individual and company investors is not possible.

Investor activity in Daggett County is highly concentrated within its two identified zip codes, with UT-Daggett-84046 emerging as the primary hub. This zip code alone accounts for 443 investor-owned SFR properties, representing a substantial 83.0% of its total SFR inventory of approximately 534 properties.

The second most active sub-geography, UT-Daggett-84023, also shows a significant investor presence, with 103 investor-owned properties. This translates to a high investor ownership rate of 74.1% within its total SFR inventory of roughly 139 properties.

A strong correlation exists between the zip codes with the highest investor-owned property counts and those with the highest investor ownership percentages. Both UT-Daggett-84046 and UT-Daggett-84023 lead in both metrics, indicating that investors are not only present but also hold a majority share of the housing stock in these specific areas.

This extreme concentration suggests that investment interest in Daggett County is not uniformly distributed but rather sharply focused on these two particular sub-markets. The high investor ownership rates in both areas signify a highly mature rental market within these zip codes.

The absence of acquisition pricing data for these specific zip codes prevents an analysis of how property values or investment costs vary across these highly concentrated sub-geographies within Daggett County. This would otherwise provide deeper insights into regional market dynamics and investment strategies.

The absence of historical transaction data for Daggett County prohibits a comprehensive analysis of landlord buying and selling activities over time. Therefore, it is impossible to determine whether landlords overall have been net buyers or net sellers in this market.

Similarly, without specific transaction counts and values, the net position of institutional investors (1000+ tier) cannot be ascertained. This prevents an understanding of whether larger investors are accumulating properties or divesting their holdings in the region.

The data gap also extends to inter-landlord trading patterns, making it impossible to calculate the percentage of buy transactions originating from other landlords or the percentage of sell transactions going to other landlords. This limits insights into market liquidity and internal investor-to-investor dynamics.

Furthermore, an analysis of average buy prices versus average sell prices, which would typically reveal implied profit margins or changes in property valuation upon sale, cannot be conducted. This obscures crucial financial aspects of investor activity in Daggett County.

The lack of historical data across different timeframes (e.g., Q4 vs. Q3, annual, or all-time) also means that trends in buy/sell ratios or shifts in transaction volumes cannot be identified, leaving a significant void in understanding market momentum and investor sentiment.

Daggett County's housing market experienced a complete cessation of transaction activity in Q4 2025, with zero total SFR transactions recorded. This indicates a frozen market for both sales and purchases during the quarter, reflecting an unusual period of absolute dormancy.

Reflecting this widespread inactivity, landlords were involved in 0 transactions, accounting for 0.0% of the total market. This signifies no new acquisition or disposition activity by investors in the county for Q4, halting any portfolio adjustments.

Across all investor tiers, transaction volumes were uniformly zero, meaning neither mom-and-pop landlords (Tier 01-04) nor institutional investors (Tier 09) engaged in any buying or selling activity. This complete lack of movement provides no data for comparative analysis of tier-specific activity or market participation.

The absence of transactions also precludes any analysis of average purchase prices by tier or the identification of price spreads between different investor sizes. Consequently, we cannot determine which tiers, if any, might have been paying more or less during this period.

Furthermore, without any transaction data, it is impossible to evaluate inter-landlord trading activity or determine which tier, if any, exhibited the highest percentage of purchases from other landlords. This limits insights into market liquidity and transaction sourcing for Q4 2025.