Still, the hunt for these properties continue.

But, if you can’t buy to rent, why not build to rent?

We currently own several single-family lots in Birmingham and plan to develop single-family homes on each one for long-term rental use. In addition, we own a one-acre parcel that can accommodate two duplexes, which we intend to operate exclusively as short-term rentals. These projects are still in the planning phase, with designs and permits expected to be finalized in time to break ground in the third quarter.

Beyond these near-term developments, we also own two separate tracts totaling 18 acres. Our long-term plan is to build 65 garden homes on one parcel and 75 townhomes on the other, with an estimated project kickoff in early 2027.

We acquired this land in 2018 at a very low cost, and it is owned free and clear. Today, we estimate the land’s value at approximately $350,000.

We originally planned to build in 2020, but the pandemic, supply-chain disruptions, and skyrocketing lumber prices forced us to pause.

Since then, the land has remained untouched. Now, that patience appears to be paying off, as market conditions are increasingly favorable for build-to-rent (BTR) projects.

Policy Changes Are Reshaping the Single-Family Market

While Trump has not fully banned institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes, recent policy actions have made it significantly more difficult for Wall Street firms to do so. At the same time, these changes have created a clearer runway for build-to-rent investors—many of whom have scaled back traditional single-family acquisitions—to expand their development pipelines.

According to a White House fact sheet outlining a proposed executive order (which still requires congressional approval), federal agencies such as the Treasury, HUD, VA, and USDA would be directed to stop insuring, guaranteeing, or securitizing single-family home purchases by large investors where legally permissible.

The order also instructs regulators like the DOJ and FTC to prioritize antitrust enforcement against coordinated pricing or vacancy strategies in local rental markets. Additionally, it calls for greater transparency by requiring full disclosure of institutional ownership within federal housing assistance programs.

Notably, these measures do not restrict build-to-rent development. As a result, major players such as Invitation Homes, Blackstone, and Pretium Partners can continue building new single-family homes without reducing inventory available to traditional homebuyers.

The Institutional “Loophole”

Despite the headline-grabbing nature of the policy, institutional investors still retain several workarounds. All-cash purchases and non-agency financing remain permitted, leaving room for REITs and private equity firms to continue acquiring homes through private capital markets.

Perhaps most importantly, the order does not clearly define what qualifies as an “institutional investor,” nor does it specify how enforcement would work in practice. This lack of clarity leaves meaningful gaps in implementation.

Inventory Impact Will Likely Be Minimal

Institutional investors currently own only about 1% of the single-family rental market. As a result, even perfect enforcement of these rules would be unlikely to meaningfully increase housing inventory.

Rather than flooding the market with new listings, the policy would primarily curb future demand. At best, this could cause homes to sit on the market slightly longer in select Sunbelt metros where inventory has already risen. In supply-constrained regions like the Northeast, where institutional ownership is minimal, the impact would likely be negligible.

Why Build-to-Rent Remains Untouched

Build-to-rent has become the preferred vehicle for institutional investors due to its scalability, centralized management, and insulation from competition with retail homebuyers and political scrutiny.

Recent policy actions only strengthen this position. According to data from John Burns Research and Consulting cited by the Wall Street Journal, firms such as Invitation Homes, American Homes 4 Rent, and Pretium delivered more than 70,000 units in 2023 and over 321,000 homes since 2012. Large homebuilders like D.R. Horton and Lennar have increasingly sold new construction directly to these BTR operators.

As Trevor Koskovich, head of investment sales at Northmarq, put it: “There’s going to have to be a change in the model. This is great for the build-to-rent segment.”

What This Means for Small Investors

The expansion of build-to-rent communities may reshape suburban housing markets. Many renters—especially families priced out of homeownership in strong school districts—are increasingly turning to BTR communities for newer housing and more space.

That said, the long-term impact on traditional single-family rentals and small investors remains unclear. While Wall Street capital will continue flowing into BTR projects, it is uncertain whether this will materially affect MLS inventory, which is where most small investors operate.

More than 90% of rental properties are still owned by mom-and-pop investors with fewer than 10 units, making it unlikely that BTR communities will dramatically disrupt the broader single-family rental market.

Pricing also differs. A 2024 analysis by Parcl Labs found that BTR rents are generally higher than traditional single-family rentals, with Beekin estimating a premium of roughly 10%–15%.

While BTR communities offer advantages such as professional management and predictable leasing, those benefits may not be enough to pull all tenants away from smaller operators.

The key question remains: will enough BTR supply come online to materially impact the SFR market?

Where Build-to-Rent Is Expanding the Fastest

Markets with abundant land and strong employment growth—particularly in the Sunbelt—are best suited for BTR communities. However, portions of the Midwest and West Coast are also seeing increased activity. Smaller investors will need to stay alert and decide whether to continue operating independently or align with larger BTR trends, each of which comes with trade-offs.

While the proposed executive order is unlikely to dramatically alter the single-family housing market overnight, it may have a meaningful impact at the margins. For everyday investors, flippers, and small operators, reduced institutional competition could create incremental opportunities in an already tight market.

The policy may not solve housing affordability on a national scale, but for those operating “in the trenches,” even small advantages can make a real difference. In an environment where margins are thin, every small win matters.

Which is why the build to rent strategy is so attractive to us.