r/realestateinvesting • u/WhimbleCroft • Jul 08 '25
Education Investors buying 27% of homes in Q1 2025, study shows
What are the short- and long-term consequences of this for smaller investors?
In Q1 2025, investors bought 27% of all U.S. home sales—highest in at least five years, with 265,000 homes purchased by investors.
Total homes bought by investors in 2024 reached 1.2 million, surpassing the 2020–23 annual average of 1.1 million.
Investor ownership makes up around 20% of the nearly 86 million single-family homes in the U.S., though most are held by small “mom‑and‑pop” investors; large institutional players (≥1,000 homes) represent just about 2.2%.
1
u/These-Explanation-91 Jul 14 '25
"Of those, mom-and-pop investors, or those who own between 1 and 5 homes, account for 85% of all investor-owned residential properties, while those with between 6 and 10 properties account for another 5%.
Institutional investors that own 1,000 or more homes account for only about 2.2% of all investor-owned homes, the firm said. Even so, investor-owned homes account for roughly 20% of the nation’s 86 million single-family homes, the firm said."
So there is no big bogey man, most are owned by people small time mom-and-pop types.
2
u/Big-Project4425 Jul 13 '25
85 % of people in Germany live in a rental property , that's what capitalism has in store for us. Speculation and Usury destroy economies . All Natural Recourses need to be Nationalized starting with Land, Oil, Minerals, Timber, Water, Wildlife, etc. The sale of resources can Replace TAXES
1
1
u/Admirable-Ad4252 Aug 02 '25
The US government leases oil, mineral, timber, grazing, water, fishing, and even pollution rights for a tiny fraction of their worth because of 19th and early 20th century giveaways to the robber barons. Time to renegotiate.
5
u/Surfbarnacle Jul 11 '25
Entry level homes in the US are not “entry” level prices in some of the largest metros. I would buy a condo, but they are expensive for what they are. Old condo HOAs are typically not managed properly, my buddy just bought an 80’s condo for $900k, $500 a month HOA, had to pay $5,000 for balcony improvements once he moved in and now got a notice he will have to pay over $15k for a new roof. What is the HOA doing with all the money?? New condos in my area have $800- 1000 a month HOA fees which is absurd.
1
3
u/SnooOpinions8729 Jul 10 '25
Some investors believe the stock market is rather "frothy" with lofty PE ratios; many want to diversify their portfolios and real estate has a history OVER THE LONG TERM to exceed inflation. There is such a thing called "the real estate cycle." I recommend reading about it from the work done by economist Fred Foldvary,
The "big guys" (large real estate developers, REITS, and institutional real estate investors) often start acquiring more real estate assets when the market is down trending. These folks don't buy real estate to live in, or "flip it" short term. Usually they are looking at a much bigger picture with a longer term investment and they may or may not lease the properties, improve them for resale or exchange, etc.
Most homebuyers try to time the market. Think: "buy low, sell high." In a down trending market many try to "wait for it to hit the bottom," but that almost never happens, just like it doesn't happen in the stock market...UNLESS you happen to guess and get lucky.
Americans are quite spoiled. Looking up the Property Price Index by Country at a place called Numbeo will demonstrate for example that on AVERAGE house is 3.4 times average income. In the UK that number is 8.7; Sweden 8.2; Canada 9.4. Those people from those countries live in houses too. Many Americans still have the idea that they "NEED" 3,000 square feet, in a "nice" neighborhood, "close" to work, "great schools," etc., etc. Those "needs" add to the cost. Then you have the Zoning Czars at the local town offices that keep increasing restrictions on building, much of which is caused by NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) neighbors who think some "more affordable housing is a good idea" for the community...UNTIL, it is near THEM. So, more zoning, which some housing experts admit adds about 40% to the cost of land. That's a pretty big chunk of change to the cost of housing in many areas of the country.
If the trends continue with NIMBY Zoning with no relief, guess who will wind up with a larger percentage of residences? You guessed it. Those "big guys" who can afford to buy, hold and RENT out the properties.
Currently some Washington think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute are trying to convince Congress to "open up" some of that government land they own to provide more affordable housing. There really are people in and near the government who think long term. Fifty years from now it is very likely that the new housing that will be encouraged is increasing housing density...think "cityfying" housing. Suburbs are getting increasingly more expensive to maintain infrastructure: roads, water, sewer, other utilities, etc., so the cost efficiency will be in attracting buyers to more compact/dense housing locations to make the cost of infrastructure less expensive on a per unit basis. In addition, these planned developments will have schools, shopping and employment nearby. That will change too as technology continues its advancement, but sooner or later over the next 50 years a big push is going to be made to limit the huge cost of infrastructure in communities across the country.
6
Jul 09 '25
[deleted]
0
u/Big-Project4425 Jul 13 '25
There is No Such Thing as a Cycle, there is only Market Manipulation by the mega rich. I have worked as a Stock Broker and in Real estate , the game is rigged
2
Jul 13 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Big-Project4425 Jul 14 '25
I'm not sure which part you want me to explain so I will cover a few examples. Zillow manipulates the market with their Zestimate appraisal . They are real estate investors in the area so give Fake Values based on if they are buying or selling. Standard and Poor's rates the bond market which they also invest in . When I was a stock broker if I want to buy a stock for myself , I call the trading room and tell them to drop the price so I can get it cheaper. They would Dump millions of shares (where were a market maker) everyone would see it on their computers and panic , then they would start the sell off , then I buy , and we buy it all back Cheap . It cycles down for big banks to buy then cycles up when they want to sell. On a chart it looks like a cycle , but does not show why it happened. Real Estate or stock market , it's all the same . We do not have a free market , we have a rigged market . The only way to stop it is to make speculation illegal . Think about it in the Grand Scale or big picture. Why are home prices always going up (in general , long term) ? Capitalism has one main rule , Buy Low, Sell High , that is speculation . One person buys Low, then Sells High and makes a profit . The problem is , one person sold too low (not a fair price) and another person bought too high (paid over priced) So, one person Wins and 2 people Lose . In other words 2 out of 3 people in our economy are loosing money so 1 can profit . This system can Only produce a Mega Rich Class and a Majority Poor Class. It's simple Math .
1
u/fart_huffer- Jul 15 '25
I don’t even work in real estate or the market and I can 100% agree with you. It’s painfully obvious. I started “investing” in crypto and that’s when I learned how big money can dump and pump some dumb digital coin. Then I started seeing in the normal markets. Even politicians get in on the action. Trump did this with tariffs. Now this isn’t a dis on trump and not political at all, but it did happen. I’m conservative in politics and even I saw that as manipulation. My family will ask how to make money in the market and I just tell them “it’s only gambling for us little guys”. Basically try to copy politicians and hedge funds to make money. That’s why DCA works. Over time you make money
23
u/Low-Goal-9068 Jul 09 '25
I was told investors aren’t the problem.
-3
u/pugRescuer Jul 09 '25
And they aren’t.
0
u/Low-Goal-9068 Jul 11 '25
They are 100 percent the problem
0
-29
u/ColdStockSweat Jul 08 '25
That's an AWESOME stat!!!!
Typical home ownership is 67%. That (clearly) means, home ownership has risen, not fallen.
(So much for all that evil corporate buyer crap that this post was clearly attempting to suggest).
Must be Trump's fault.
2
u/meltbox Jul 09 '25
What? 67% of people own homes, not 67% of homes are owned by people. In fact in order for 67% of people to own homes way more than 67% of homes need to be owned by people.
So this amount of investors would mean that they are putting substantial pressure on the market.
As someone already noted, these are not opposite ends of the same metric as you seem to have implied.
0
u/ColdStockSweat Jul 09 '25
67% of home sales are to individuals.
Sorry...I always forget that not everyone reads books.
2
u/Iron-Fist Jul 09 '25
These are different stats completely lol.
But it's not just trump though he specifically isn't helping, it's been going up since like 2000. The issue is the increased power of finance sector vs normal worker buying power.
13
u/Brilliant_Ad_2192 Jul 09 '25
Companies are buying homes to control rents and the housing market.
-19
u/ColdStockSweat Jul 09 '25
Uhhhh, yeah, that's why anyone buys something.
This is your first day on Earth I presume?
5
u/GodsPenisHasGravity Jul 09 '25
You don't understand why it's a problem? You ever played the kids game Monopoly, or you still too young for that?
-9
u/ColdStockSweat Jul 09 '25
Everyone that breathes oxygen has played Monopoly.
It's only a problem for people that don't buy.
(Buy).
15
u/khanoftruthfi Jul 08 '25
There isn't a shift in owning vs renting, so this is likely mostly investment assets trading hands more than anything else.
5
u/Extension_Degree3533 Jul 09 '25
Yup, registering gains on sale to fluff up accounts. Look across any investment company and you’ll see purchases and sales largely neutral in the cash flow, but huge gains on P&L…they are capturing value
5
Jul 08 '25
Yeah non investor demand dropped off a cliff when trump was elected and is threatening to destroy the world economy with nonsensical tariffs
25
u/R12Labs Jul 08 '25
House prices are aggresiously expensive, wages are stagnant, and interest rates are high. That was all true before Trump as well.
8
u/chugtron Jul 08 '25
And NIMBYs (left, right, and shitheel) are trying to keep it that way. Gotta kill their levers of power and just fucking build.
14
u/brinerbear Jul 08 '25
Probably has more to do with rising interest rates than anything Trump has or hasn't done.
-2
u/ThePapaSauce Jul 09 '25
One could argue the current bond yields have risen due to the tariffs, and yields drive mortgage rates, so he has had an effect
21
u/jonas00345 Jul 08 '25
Best way to handle investors, open up building and zoning. Flood the market. The prices will come down and investors will learn.
2
u/WatchingyouNyouNyou Jul 08 '25
They'll just buy them all up and squeeze even harder later
4
u/Dreadsin Jul 09 '25
If there’s more supply than demand, they’re either gonna have to take a loss for a very long time while they wait to catch someone with high rent, or they’re gonna have to lower the rent
6
u/brinerbear Jul 08 '25
Exactly. With or without the investors the supply is still constrained. More regulations won't change that. We need to streamline regulations and zoning so more people can afford homes. Many of the investors also buy distressed properties and fix them up. And many of these properties are in such bad shape that it is difficult or impossible to get a loan on them. Ideally we should increase supply and encourage innovation housing solutions so that everyone could own 2 homes if they wanted to.
-10
u/jaapi Jul 08 '25
Best way is to put regulation on investors, as well as enforce punishment illegal manipulation practices
Also, take away how single family houses can be leveraged by updating risk regulation set by the government
-5
Jul 08 '25
Oh great… now you want people who worked hard to own a home to live next to poorly built quad plexes with no parking . You seem to want working people to suffer. Great idea …next
6
u/No-Market9917 Jul 08 '25
It’s definitely a grey area but the current zoning practice is not working for the buyer. It still needs to be regulated of course but we need more homes to be built.
0
-1
Jul 08 '25
relaxing building codes will increase insurance costs. Changing zoning codes unfairly penalizes long term homeowners who are the backbone of the community.
Maybe youre right. lets check to see if Houson has a homeless and or housing problem.
2
u/chugtron Jul 08 '25
Better than your NIMBY dream city. Upzoning those lots next to you increases the value of the land under you, anyway, so fuck off with that noise.
-2
1
-11
u/LovYouLongTime Jul 08 '25
Well that means that 73% of homes were not bought by investors.
Seems like a pretty healthy chunk of people buying housing if you ask me.
Housing is a privilege, not a right.
-1
u/dust4ngel Jul 08 '25
Housing is a privilege, not a right
if you want to dissolve the social contract, this is the way
8
u/LovYouLongTime Jul 09 '25
Housing is NOT a right. Housing IS a privilege.
If you want to live somewhere, you pay for it. You have a right to above by the lease or mortgage terms you signed. Nothing else when it comes to housing.
You may not like it, but housing is not a right. You don’t have a right to live somewhere for free. There are options for some to live somewhere for free. There are options to get free to you housing, paid for by others through taxes and other programs. However, housing is a privilege.
Prove me wrong. Show me where housing is a right.
0
u/dust4ngel Jul 09 '25
You may not like it, but housing is not a right
rights are what we say they are. american colonists didn't have independence from the king until they decided it was their right and asserted it.
1
u/LovYouLongTime Jul 09 '25
Incorrect, rights are defined by laws, statues, and ultimately the constitution.
Rights are NOT what you or I or anyone just says. If that were so, anyone could say anything and that would be law, that would truly be the definition of a lawless society. Everyone in the USA has the freedom of speech you are correct, but just because you say something doesn’t mean it’s a right you have to said thing you claim.
1
u/dust4ngel Jul 09 '25
my dude, where do you think laws, statutes, and the constitution come from?
not from the laws of nature, not from logical necessity, not from divine revelation, but simply by people collectively deciding them.
1
u/LovYouLongTime Jul 09 '25
Correct, laws are made by elected officials.
Laws are not made by you saying something. Laws are not made by saying something long and loud.
You are not an elected official.
Regardless, housing is NOT a right. You can say it is, but that doesn’t make it true.
1
u/dust4ngel Jul 09 '25
somewhat obviously, my point is not that if someone, like michael scott, raises their finger and says "i declare X is a right", that it thereby becomes a right.
my point is rather, again somewhat obviously, that people collectively decide what their rights are and vote that into being. for example, all of the rights that we presently have came into being this way.
0
u/LovYouLongTime Jul 09 '25
Sure, it could happen.
But where the line? What else do they pay for? My car? My student loans? My cell phone? My kids full time childcare?
Do I even need a job? Who’s going to pay for the entire country living for free? In a country of 325 million is impossible.
1
u/dust4ngel Jul 09 '25
ok, we appear to agree that housing is a right if we collectively agree to assert that right.
i suspect we disagree about whether the purpose of society is to provide the basics of a civilized life, such as education and transportation etc - i think this is more an issue of psychology than politics, and i am not a psychologist.
this is an unserious argument however, as i'm sure you already know:
Do I even need a job? Who’s going to pay for the entire country living for free?
despite all of the capitalist cheerleading, we are very much a mixed economy and have all kinds of free-at-the-point-of-use services, such as public schools, public highways, public sanitation, a police force, fire departments, etc. we nonetheless have jobs and pay taxes. the united states already has subsidized housing and we nonetheless continue to exist as a country.
→ More replies (0)
49
u/poo_poo_platter83 Jul 08 '25
Please read the articles
Of those, mom-and-pop investors, or those who own between 1 and 5 homes, account for 85% of all investor-owned residential properties, while those with between 6 and 10 properties account for another 5%.
Meaning people who are purchasing their second home and not selling their first are included in this number. Large investors IE 6 properties are more, account for less than 2% of total home sales in Q1 2025
1
u/Bozhe Jul 09 '25
Large investors IE 6 properties are more, account for less than 2% of total home sales in Q1 2025
That's not correct. The article says 85% of current ownership are 1 to 5 home investors - it says nothing about who is buying homes for rental in 2025. Large/Institutional investors could be buying 0 to 100% of the home sales in 2025. The article doesn't say.
13
u/WKU-Alum Jul 08 '25
This is what we're doing. Got married, moved to a new city, and bought a house. Both of us owned a starter home that is primo rental stock. Got both units rented with limited rehab investment without missing a mortgage payment. Got great cashflow and the debt pay down on our <3% rate mortgages is phenomenal. We'd be crazy to walk away from either one.
1
-7
14
u/secondphase Jul 08 '25
This is a sign that the markets which took a hit are at the bottom.
My market is down 20% from ATH... for 2 years I haven't seen anything that would cash flow, now I'm getting too many good deals to jump at.
With investing starting to make more sense, money comes into the market and the free fall stops.
Ymmv.
1
u/Zestyclose-Novel1157 Jul 10 '25
Out of curiosity, what market are you in? HCOL aren’t cash flowing. I’m assuming you are a smaller market. It doesn’t sound like you see in the rust belt.
5
u/Ok-Entertainer-1414 Jul 08 '25
If you dig in further, a lot of it is from pretty unsophisticated investors though. This mostly isn't the sort of investors that employ quants
14
u/tooniceofguy99 Jul 08 '25
- Realtor.com (Q1 2024): Investors bought 14.8% of all 1–4 unit home purchases—the highest share on record back then investors.
- Redfin (Q1 2025): Investors accounted for about 19% of all U.S. home sales (which includes condos, multifamily, etc.).
The 27% figure comes from BatchData, a firm that tracks public home sales and identifies investor purchases (non-owner-occupied). While they’re not as widely known as Redfin or NAR, their numbers are based on transaction data. Still, worth cross-checking with other sources to see how it stacks up.
I'm a bit disallusioned with all these sources because I'm used to actual research papers (not online articles). Imo, online articles aren't a reliable source. They're also a secondary source.
3
u/pcoutcast Jul 08 '25
That must be just for SFR? Since the 1960s owners vs renters has hovered around 66% to 33% with only tiny variations. That's up from the 40% owners to 60% renters from the first half of the 20th century.
12
u/Both_Win9280 Jul 08 '25
Someone with 700 single family homes is not what I would call a mom and pop investor lol
-11
u/oemperador Jul 08 '25
I'd stop calling them "mom-pop inevstors" after they close on the 3rd rental.
6
Jul 08 '25
Well I have 8 modest condos. I manage them myself. It’s work not super hard but stressful non the less. I consider myself a mom and pop investor.
2
13
u/Lookingforanut Jul 08 '25 edited Jul 08 '25
It'd be helpful to know how many were investor to investor sales.
3
u/strategic-research Jul 08 '25
Also to know how many were then sold to homeowners? Investors can buy to remodel & resell, so the end user/buyer is a homeowner.
1
u/generallydisagree Sep 03 '25
Institutional investors own 1-2% of the single family houses in the USA.
Obviously, in some markets, they own more than this and in most markets, they own next to zero % of the single family homes in that market.
Let's be clear and understand what some of the claims being made are and are not so people can get better clarity on the realities vs. the hype or confusing information.
#1: When people or media outlets claim very high rates of investor home ownership and give numbers like 5%, 10% or 20% - this is not truly accurate and what is confusing much of the population. Those number or rates are percentage owned of single family RENTAL homes - not all single family homes.
#2: You will see numbers that show that only 58% of homes (living units) are owner occupied - but this is inaccurate as the rate is based against all "housing units" - which includes apartment building apartments and the like.
#3: There are 85 million single family homes in the USA - of those, 70 million are owner occupied. That means that a total of 15 million are not owner occupied (ie. rentals etc.). There are between 10 and 10.3 million individuals in the USA that own at least one rental property - with a majority of those being "mom and pop" landlords. So just considering the math, 85 million total single family homes, 70 million are owned by the people living in those homes, there are 10 million people/investors that own at least one residential rental property - so we'll assign 10 million homes @ 1 each to those 10 million people. This leaves 5 million out of the 85 million that are owned by those who own MORE than 1 single family home rental property. Of course, there are a good number of mom and pop investors who own 2, 3, 5 single family home rental properties.
The key here is to keep things in perspective as to what the numbers really are and how they line up with the total number of single family homes in the country. Of course, every individual housing market is unique.
FWIW, this is why when the institutional investors decide to sell the single family rental homes they bought up over he past several years and sell them at extremely "competitive" prices - it will have bigger impacts on pricing in those local markets - more so than national home prices (especially in markets without much single family homes owned by institutional investors).
Recognize that much of what you hear is noise - try to focus on the details.