Clark (WI) Investor Pulse Report (2025-Q4)

Real Estate comprehensive investment analysis of investor activity in the Clark (WI) single-family residential housing market. Discover ownership trends, transaction patterns, and market insights.

Market Overview

Total SFR Properties in Clark (WI)
9,701
Total Investors in Clark (WI)
224
Investor Owned SFR in Clark (WI)
189(1.9%)
Individual Landlords
Landlords
154
SFR Owned
118
Corporate Landlords
Landlords
70
SFR Owned
79
Understanding Property Counts

Distinct Count Methodology: The total 189 represents distinct properties — if 2+ landlords co-own the same property, it's counted only once. This provides the most accurate representation of investor-owned SFR properties.

Why totals don't sum: When broken down by Individual vs Corporate ownership (or by tier), properties with co-ownership across categories are counted once per category. For example, if a property is co-owned by an individual AND a corporate landlord, it appears in both counts. This is why Individual + Corporate totals may exceed the distinct total by 2-4%, and percentages may sum to 100-104%.

Market Visualization

Chart Section2 Coverage
Chart Section3 Ownership Donut
Chart Section4 Distribution

Key Market Insights

Mom-and-Pop Landlords Dominate Clark County with 89.9% Ownership as Institutions Become Net Sellers
Investors own 189 SFR properties in Clark County, WI, representing 1.9% of the market. Individual, mom-and-pop landlords control the vast majority of this portfolio (89.9%), while institutional investors own just 1.1%. In Q4, landlords purchased 4.1% of all homes sold, securing them at a 27.3% discount compared to traditional homeowners, even as both landlords and institutions acted as net sellers.
Landlord Owned Current Holdings
Investors hold 189 SFR properties in Clark County, with individuals owning 62.4%.
Landlord portfolios are overwhelmingly owned outright, with 158 cash properties versus only 31 financed. The rental market is robust, with 142 of the 189 investor-owned properties actively rented. Individual landlords (154) significantly outnumber company landlords (70).
Landlord vs Traditional Homeowners
Landlords secured a 27.3% discount in Q4, paying $52,458 less than homeowners.
The price advantage for landlords fluctuated dramatically, peaking at a 41.6% discount ($92,414) in Q3 before settling at 27.3% in Q4. This contrasts sharply with Q2, when the discount was a negligible 0.3% ($649). The average landlord purchase price in Q4 2025 was $139,350.
Current Quarter Purchases
Landlords purchased 4.1% of homes sold in Q4, split evenly between new and institutional buyers.
Mom-and-pop landlords accounted for 50.0% of investor purchases (2 properties). In a surprising turn, institutional investors also purchased 2 properties, matching the mom-and-pop volume despite their small overall market share. One new single-property landlord entered the market this quarter.
Ownership by Tier
Mom-and-pop landlords dominate Clark County, controlling 89.9% of investor-owned homes.
In stark contrast, institutional investors with over 1,000 properties own just 1.1% of the local investor portfolio (2 properties). The single-property landlord tier is the largest segment by far, alone accounting for 133 properties or 70.4% of all investor-owned SFRs.
Ownership by Tier & Type
Companies assume majority ownership in portfolios of 6-10 properties, controlling 90% of that tier.
Individuals dominate smaller tiers, owning 70.9% of single-property portfolios and 61.9% of 3-5 property portfolios. The clear crossover from individual to corporate ownership happens beyond the 5-property mark. In the 11-20 property tier, companies also own a 90.0% majority.
Geographic Distribution
Investor activity in Clark County is concentrated in zip code 54456 with 61 properties.
Zip code 54436 has the highest investor penetration rate at 5.1%. Other areas of concentration include 54437 with 20 investor-owned homes (2.6% rate) and 54436 with 29 properties. Data for several other zip codes was not available.
Historical Transactions
Clark County landlords were net sellers in Q4 and for 2025, reversing 2024's net buyer trend.
In Q4, landlords sold 6 properties while buying only 4. This contributes to a yearly total of 14 buys versus 18 sells in 2025. This is a direct reversal from 2024, when they were net buyers with 11 purchases against 8 sales.
Current Quarter Transactions
Landlords were involved in 2.7% of Q4 transactions, with institutions buying exclusively from other landlords.
Institutional investors paid 20.3% less than new landlords, averaging $138,700 per property compared to $174,000 for single-property buyers. Strikingly, 100% of institutional purchases were from other landlords, while 0% of mom-and-pop purchases came from this channel.

Want deeper insights tailored to your investment strategy?

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Current Holdings Portfolio

Analysis of landlord property holdings by type, financing method, and owner category

Chart Section5 Holdings
Key Insight
Investors hold 189 SFR properties in Clark County, with individuals owning 62.4%.
Detailed Findings

In Clark County, WI, landlords own a total of 189 Single-Family Residential (SFR) properties, making up 1.9% of the total SFR market of 9,701 homes.

Individual investors form the backbone of the rental market, holding 118 properties, which accounts for 62.4% of all investor-owned SFRs. In contrast, company investors own the remaining 79 properties (41.8%).

The investor landscape is composed of 224 distinct landlords, with a clear majority of 154 being individuals, compared to 70 companies, highlighting the prevalence of small-scale investment in the region.

A significant majority of investor-owned properties, 142 out of 189, are classified as rented, demonstrating a strong focus on generating rental income within the portfolio.

Cash is the dominant financing method for landlords in Clark County. Investors own 158 properties with cash, far outweighing the 31 properties that are financed, signaling a low-leverage approach to real estate investment in this market.

Acquisition Timing & Pricing

Comparison of acquisition prices between landlords and traditional homeowners

Key Insight
Landlords secured a 27.3% discount in Q4, paying $52,458 less than homeowners.
Detailed Findings

Investors in Clark County demonstrated a strong purchasing advantage in Q4 2025, acquiring properties for an average price of $139,350. This represents a substantial 27.3% discount compared to the $191,808 paid by traditional homeowners, saving investors an average of $52,458 per property.

The price gap between landlords and homeowners has been volatile throughout 2025. The discount surged to an incredible 41.6% ($92,414) in Q3, up from just 0.3% ($649) in Q2, indicating fluctuating market conditions or opportunistic buying.

Comparing recent activity to previous years reveals significant price appreciation. The average landlord acquisition price of $169,740 for the full year 2025 is a notable decrease from the 2024 average of $371,333, though it remains below the pandemic-era (2020-2023) average of $205,810.

Landlord acquisition activity has slowed considerably. After purchasing 11 properties in 2024, investors acquired 14 in 2025, with zero recorded purchases in many timeframes, suggesting a highly selective and cautious purchasing strategy.

Chart Section6 Prices
Chart Section6 Prices Alt
Chart Section6 Trends
Chart Section6 Yoy Comparison

Current Quarter Purchase Summary

Analysis of Q4 2025 purchase activity by investor tier and type

Chart Section7 Purchases
Chart Section7 Tiers
Key Insight
Landlords purchased 4.1% of homes sold in Q4, split evenly between new and institutional buyers.
Detailed Findings

Investor activity accounted for a small but notable portion of the Q4 2025 market in Clark County, with landlords purchasing 4 of the 98 total SFRs sold, a market share of 4.1%.

The Q4 purchasing activity was evenly divided between the smallest and largest investors. Mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) acquired 2 homes, representing 50.0% of investor activity.

Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) matched this volume, also purchasing 2 homes (50.0% of investor activity). This level of Q4 activity from large institutions is highly disproportionate to their 1.1% share of total ownership in the county.

The market continues to attract new entrants, with 1 new single-property landlord making a purchase in Q4, accounting for 25.0% of all investor-bought properties.

This quarter's activity highlights a polarized market, with acquisitions concentrated at the opposite ends of the investor spectrum—brand new entrants and massive institutional players—while mid-size landlords remained on the sidelines.

Ownership by Purchase Tier

Distribution of investor-owned properties across portfolio size tiers

Key Insight
Mom-and-pop landlords dominate Clark County, controlling 89.9% of investor-owned homes.
Detailed Findings

The investor landscape in Clark County is overwhelmingly controlled by small-scale operators. Mom-and-pop landlords (owning 1-10 properties) hold a combined 89.9% of all investor-owned SFRs, demonstrating their critical role in the local rental market.

Single-property landlords (Tier 01) are the most significant group, owning 133 properties, which constitutes 70.4% of the entire investor-owned housing stock. This highlights the market's reliance on first-time and small-scale investors.

Despite national narratives, institutional investors (Tier 09) have a minuscule footprint in Clark County, owning just 2 properties, or 1.1% of the investor-owned market. Their presence is dwarfed by every other landlord tier except for the 51-100 and 101-1,000 property tiers.

Mid-size landlords (11-1,000 properties) represent a small fraction of the market, collectively owning just 17 properties or 9.0% of the investor portfolio.

The data clearly shows that the rental housing supply in Clark County is provided not by large corporations, but by a broad base of local, small-portfolio landlords.

Chart Section8 Distribution
Chart Section8 Prices
Chart Section8 Prices Q4
Chart Section8 Yoy Comparison

Need custom portfolio analysis based on these tier insights?

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Ownership by Tier & Owner Type

Breakdown of individual vs corporate ownership across portfolio tiers

Chart Section9 Ownership
Chart Section9 Growth
Chart Section9 Growth Q4
Chart Section9 Yoy Comparison
Key Insight
Companies assume majority ownership in portfolios of 6-10 properties, controlling 90% of that tier.
Detailed Findings

Ownership structure in Clark County shows a distinct shift from individual to corporate as portfolio sizes increase. While individuals own the majority of smaller portfolios, companies become the dominant owners in tiers with 6 or more properties.

Individuals form the foundation of the market, owning 70.9% of all single-property landlord portfolios (100 properties) and 61.9% of portfolios in the 3-5 property tier (13 properties).

The crossover point occurs decisively at the 6-10 property tier, where company ownership skyrockets to 90.0% (9 properties). This trend continues into the 11-20 property tier, where companies also hold a 90.0% share.

Even in the two-property tier, ownership is split evenly, with individuals and companies each holding 3 properties (50.0%), signaling the early entry of corporate structures into multi-property investment.

This pattern suggests that as investors scale their operations beyond a handful of properties in Clark County, they increasingly adopt a corporate structure for management, liability, or financing purposes.

Geographic Distribution

Regional breakdown of investor activity and ownership patterns

Key Insight
Investor activity in Clark County is concentrated in zip code 54456 with 61 properties.
Detailed Findings

Geographic analysis reveals that landlord investment in Clark County is not evenly distributed, with specific zip codes attracting a higher concentration of activity.

The zip code 54456 stands out as the hub for investor ownership by volume, containing 61 investor-owned SFR properties, which represents a 2.6% ownership rate for that area.

For the highest market penetration, zip code 54436 leads with an investor ownership rate of 5.1%, encompassing 29 properties. This indicates a stronger landlord presence relative to the total housing stock in that specific community.

The zip code 54437 is another notable area, holding 20 investor-owned properties and an ownership rate of 2.6%.

These patterns highlight that while overall investor ownership in the county is low at 1.9%, certain neighborhoods and communities experience a more concentrated level of landlord activity.

Chart Section10 Top Regions
Chart Section10 Top Pct

Historical Transactions

Buy/sell transaction trends over time for all landlords and institutional investors

Chart Section11 Buysell
Chart Section11 Buysell Price
Chart Section11 Yoy All Landlords
Chart Section11 Institutional
Chart Section11 Institutional Price
Chart Section11 Yoy Institutional
Key Insight
Clark County landlords were net sellers in Q4 and for 2025, reversing 2024's net buyer trend.
Detailed Findings

Transaction data reveals a significant shift in landlord strategy in Clark County, moving from accumulation to disposition. For the full year 2025, landlords were net sellers, with 18 properties sold versus only 14 purchased.

This trend accelerated in the most recent quarter, Q4 2025, where landlords sold 6 properties while acquiring only 4, resulting in a net disposition of 2 properties.

This marks a clear reversal from the prior year. In 2024, landlords were net buyers, adding a net of 3 properties to their portfolios with 11 buys and 8 sells.

Institutional investors (1,000+ properties) have been consistently divesting from the market. They were net sellers in Q4 2025 (2 buys vs. 3 sells), for the full year 2025 (2 buys vs. 5 sells), and also in 2024 (1 buy vs. 2 sells), indicating a strategic, long-term reduction of their holdings in the county.

The shift to a net-seller position for the overall landlord market in 2025 suggests a response to changing market conditions, potentially involving profit-taking or a strategic repositioning of assets.

Current Quarter Transactions

Q4 2025 transaction analysis by tier, price, and inter-landlord activity

Key Insight
Landlords were involved in 2.7% of Q4 transactions, with institutions buying exclusively from other landlords.
Detailed Findings

In Q4 2025, landlords participated in 4 of the 146 total SFR transactions in Clark County, representing a 2.7% share of market activity.

A significant pricing disparity emerged between investor tiers. Institutional buyers (1,000+ properties) acquired their 2 properties at an average price of $138,700, demonstrating considerable purchasing power.

In contrast, the new single-property landlord paid $174,000 for their home, a 20.3% premium over the price paid by institutional investors. This suggests larger players can secure more favorable pricing.

The sourcing of deals also differed dramatically by tier. Institutional investors acquired 100% of their properties from other landlords, indicating strategic, off-market, or portfolio-based transactions.

Conversely, mom-and-pop investors (Tiers 01-04) made 0% of their purchases from other landlords, suggesting they are competing with traditional homebuyers on the open market for their acquisitions.

Chart Section12 Transactions
Chart Section12 Prices
Chart Section12 Prices Detail

Ready to leverage this data for your real estate investment decisions?

TALK TO AN EXPERT

Executive Summary

Small Landlords Control 89.9% of Clark County's Investor Market as Institutions Retreat as Net Sellers
Holdings
Landlords own 189 SFR properties in Clark County, WI, representing 1.9% of the county's market. Individual investors are the dominant force, holding 118 of these properties (62.4%), while companies own the remaining 79 (41.8%).
Pricing
In Q4 2025, landlords paid 27.3% less than traditional homeowners, securing an average discount of $52,458 per property ($139,350 vs. $191,808).
Activity
Landlords purchased 4.1% of all homes sold in Q4 (4 properties), with activity split evenly between mom-and-pop landlords (2 properties) and institutional investors (2 properties). One new single-property landlord entered the market.
Market Share
The market is dominated by small investors, as mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties) control 89.9% of investor-owned housing. In stark contrast, institutional investors (1,000+ properties) own just 1.1%.
Ownership Type
Individual investors command the smaller end of the market, but companies become the majority owners in portfolios starting at the 6-10 property tier, where they control 90.0% of properties.
Transactions
Landlords in Clark County were net sellers in Q4 2025 (4 buys vs. 6 sells), a trend consistent for the year. Institutional investors are also consistently divesting, ending Q4 as net sellers (2 buys vs. 3 sells).
Market Narrative

The single-family rental market in Clark County, WI, is fundamentally driven by small, local investors rather than large corporations. Landlords own 189 SFR properties, just 1.9% of the county's total housing stock. This portfolio is firmly in the hands of mom-and-pop landlords (1-10 properties), who control a commanding 89.9% of all investor-owned homes. Individual investors own a 62.4% majority of properties, while institutional firms (1,000+ properties) have a negligible footprint, owning only 1.1% of the investor market.

In terms of recent activity, investor behavior in Q4 2025 reflects a cautious and strategic market. Landlords purchased only 4.1% of homes sold but did so with a significant financial advantage, paying 27.3% less than traditional homebuyers. Transaction data reveals a broader trend of divestment, as both the overall landlord pool and institutional investors specifically have become net sellers, reversing the accumulation trend seen in 2024. Institutional buyers who were active demonstrated sophisticated strategies, paying 20.3% less than new landlords and acquiring 100% of their properties from other investors.

The key takeaway for the Clark County housing market is its stability and insulation from the large-scale institutional activity seen elsewhere. The market's health is tied to the decisions of hundreds of small-scale, individual landlords who provide the bulk of the rental housing. The current trend of net selling suggests a market where investors may be taking profits or repositioning capital, while new entrants and sophisticated institutional players engage in highly targeted, opportunistic acquisitions. This dynamic indicates a mature, liquid market for rental properties but not one undergoing a corporate takeover.

About This Report

Report Methodology

This report analyzes BatchData's Investor Pulse dataset, covering single-family residential (SFR) investor activity across the United States.

Data is extracted from 15 CSV files covering ownership, transactions, and pricing trends, then analyzed using AI-powered insights.

Property Counting Methodology:

Distinct Counts: All headline totals represent distinct properties. If 2+ landlords co-own the same property, it's counted only once. This provides accurate market representation.

Category Breakdowns: When analyzing by tier (01-09), owner type (Individual/Corporate), or occupancy status, properties with co-ownership across categories are counted once per category. This causes breakdowns to sum 2-4% higher than totals, and percentages may sum to 100-104%. This is expected and reflects co-ownership patterns.

TierPropertiesCategory
01-041-10Mom-and-Pop
05-0711-100Mid-Size
08101-1000Large
091000+Institutional
About BatchData

BatchData provides comprehensive real estate data and analytics, offering insights into property ownership, investor activity, and market trends across the United States.

The Investor Pulse dataset tracks single-family residential (SFR) investor behavior at national, state, county, and MSA levels.

For more information, visit batchdata.io or explore our API documentation.

Data Freshness
Report GeneratedMarch 17, 2026 at 10:16 PM
Data PeriodQ4 2025
Geography LevelCounty
GeographyClark (WI)
×
Chart Section2 Coverage
Chart Section2 Coverage
×
Chart Section3 Ownership Donut
Chart Section3 Ownership Donut
×
Chart Section3 Ownership Bar
Chart Section3 Ownership Bar
×
Chart Section4 Distribution
Chart Section4 Distribution
×
Chart Section5 Holdings
Chart Section5 Holdings
×
Chart Section6 Prices
Chart Section6 Prices
×
Chart Section6 Prices Alt
Chart Section6 Prices Alt
×
Chart Section6 Yoy Comparison
Chart Section6 Yoy Comparison
×
Chart Section6 Trends
Chart Section6 Trends
×
Chart Section7 Purchases
Chart Section7 Purchases
×
Chart Section7 Tiers
Chart Section7 Tiers
×
Chart Section8 Distribution
Chart Section8 Distribution
×
Chart Section8 Prices
Chart Section8 Prices
×
Chart Section8 Prices Q4
Chart Section8 Prices Q4
×
Chart Section8 Prices 2020
Chart Section8 Prices 2020
×
Chart Section8 Yoy Comparison
Chart Section8 Yoy Comparison
×
Chart Section9 Ownership
Chart Section9 Ownership
×
Chart Section9 Growth
Chart Section9 Growth
×
Chart Section9 Growth Q4
Chart Section9 Growth Q4
×
Chart Section9 Yoy Comparison
Chart Section9 Yoy Comparison
×
Chart Section10 Top Regions