How Many Single Family Homes Are Owned by Corporations?

Corporate involvement in single-family home ownership is a growing public interest. This article clarifies the nature and scale of corporate single-family home ownership in the United States, defining it, presenting current data, identifying investor types, and discussing measurement challenges.

Defining Corporate Single-Family Home Ownership

Corporate ownership of single-family homes refers to residential properties held by any business entity, rather than being directly owned by an individual. This definition extends beyond large, publicly traded real estate investment trusts (REITs) or private equity firms. It encompasses a wide array of entities, including smaller, often local, businesses structured as limited liability companies (LLCs), partnerships, or other corporate forms. These business structures are chosen for legal protections, such as shielding personal assets from business liabilities, and for potential tax benefits, like deductions for property expenses and depreciation.

Researchers and data providers classify a home as corporately owned when its tax bill or property records indicate ownership by an entity rather than a natural person. For instance, if an LLC, LP, or INC is listed as the owner, the property is considered corporately held. This broad classification is important because it captures diverse investment scales, from an individual who places a single rental property into an LLC for liability reasons to a large firm managing thousands of homes.

Current Landscape of Corporate Ownership

Corporate ownership of single-family homes represents a notable, though often debated, segment of the U.S. housing market. As of early 2025, corporations are estimated to own approximately 10% of single-family homes in America. This figure indicates a slight decrease from 2014, when institutional ownership was as high as 11.5%. Despite this overall percentage, investor activity remains substantial, with one out of every four real estate transactions in 2024 involving an investor, whether small or large.

While the overall share might seem modest, the concentration of corporate ownership can be much higher in specific regional markets, particularly within the Sun Belt states. For example, institutional investors own a greater share of homes in certain areas. In 2022, approximately 25% of Atlanta, Georgia’s single-family rental housing market was owned by institutional investors, with similar concentrations in Jacksonville, Florida (21%), and Charlotte, North Carolina (18%). This regional variation highlights how corporate investment can significantly impact local housing dynamics.

Large institutional investors collectively held about 450,000 single-family homes by 2022, with the five largest investors owning nearly 300,000 of these properties. This represents about 2% of the single-family rental housing stock nationally, but their influence is more pronounced in specific metropolitan areas. Despite concerns about corporate landlords impacting housing affordability, some argue that institutional ownership accounts for less than 5% of single-family rental homes, with other factors like underbuilding and zoning having a greater impact on housing costs.

Identifying Corporate Investors

Corporate investors in single-family homes span a broad spectrum, ranging from massive, publicly traded entities to individual investors operating through business structures. At one end are large institutional investors, such as Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and private equity firms, which pool capital from various sources to acquire extensive portfolios of properties. Companies like Invitation Homes, American Homes 4 Rent, and Pretium (through Progress Residential) are prominent examples, collectively holding hundreds of thousands of single-family rental properties across the nation. These entities often focus on acquiring homes in high-growth areas, particularly in the Southeast and Southwest, where they can achieve economies of scale in property management.

Conversely, a significant portion of corporate ownership comes from smaller investors operating through business entities like LLCs or limited partnerships. These can be individuals or small groups who own a modest number of rental properties, often between one and four units, and choose to place them under a corporate structure for liability protection or tax planning. While these smaller entities may not command national headlines, their collective presence is substantial; in 2021, individuals and small businesses accounted for over 85% of single-family rental homes in the United States, with a significant portion held through partnerships and LLCs. This diverse investor landscape means that “corporate ownership” is not solely the domain of Wall Street giants but includes numerous smaller, localized operations.

Challenges in Measuring Corporate Ownership

Accurately quantifying corporate ownership of single-family homes presents several complexities due to the fragmented nature of property data and diverse ownership structures. A primary challenge stems from the lack of a centralized, comprehensive database for property ownership across the United States. Property records are maintained at the county level, leading to inconsistencies in data collection and accessibility nationwide. Researchers often rely on analyzing property tax records or public records requests, which can be time-consuming and vary in detail from one jurisdiction to another.

The use of limited liability companies (LLCs) and other business entities further complicates measurement, as a single investor might use multiple LLCs, sometimes with different names or mailing addresses, to acquire properties. This practice can obscure the true beneficial owner and make it difficult to determine the full extent of a single entity’s portfolio. While some jurisdictions are implementing transparency laws, such as requiring LLCs to disclose their human owners, these efforts are still developing and may not capture all layers of ownership, especially those involving trusts or offshore entities. The varying definitions of what constitutes an “institutional investor” among different research bodies also contributes to discrepancies in reported statistics, making it challenging to compare data consistently.