2026 Chicago Housing Provider Survey: Rental Market Data & Insights
The definitive Chicago housing provider survey examining rent collection, vacancy rates, operating costs, and policy impacts across Chicagoland’s neighborhood rental market. Survey data from NBOA member associations representing small landlords throughout Chicago.
The 2026 Chicago housing provider survey from the Neighborhood Building Owners Alliance (NBOA) presents comprehensive rental market data from Chicagoland neighborhood housing providers. This annual Chicago housing provider survey examines rent collection rates, vacancy trends, operating costs, and regional market disparities across Chicago’s diverse rental housing landscape. The 2026 findings reveal critical insights into how local ordinances, including the COPA (Chicago Owns Properties Act), impact small landlords and the Chicago rental market ecosystem. Survey respondents represent member associations across Chicago neighborhoods, providing ground-level data on the realities of managing rental housing in Chicago.
Executive Summary
High-level findings from the 2026 survey, drawn across operations, fee structures, the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (COPA), and respondent demographics. Notable shifts and significant signals are highlighted below.
Collection rates concentrate above 95%, but vary materially by region.
76.6% of North-region respondents collect more than 95% of rent, compared with 56.1% in the South/West group.
If move-in fees were banned, the majority response is to raise rents.
88.8% of respondents say they would raise rents — either across the portfolio or only on new leases — if move-in fees were eliminated.
Among providers exposed to COPA, transactions slow and buyer interest declines.
Of respondents who sold a COPA-area property, 51.7% reported noticeably fewer interested buyers, and a majority report at least 30 added days of process.
Operating Trends
Two operating metrics — average year-to-date rent collection and current vacancy — tracked across NBOA Housing Provider Surveys from December 2020 through April 2026.
Share of respondents reporting collection of greater than 95% of expected rent
Metric 01 · December 2020 – April 2026
High-end rent collection has climbed from 39.0% in December 2020 to 66.9% in April 2026 — a roughly 28-point gain over five years. The trajectory accelerated sharply after early 2024, with collection rates above 95% becoming the modal experience for NBOA members.
Share of respondents reporting zero vacancy
Metric 02 · December 2020 – April 2026
The share of respondents with no vacant units rose from 33.0% to 50.4% over the same period. Half the membership now operates at full occupancy — a tightening rental market reflected directly on respondent balance sheets.
Survey methodology and question framing have evolved across periods; charts reflect the most directly comparable metric for each period.
Respondent Profile
Where respondents operate, what they own, and how they engage with their portfolios.
Where respondents own properties
Share of respondents operating in each area of the Chicagoland region. Multi-select; respondents may operate across multiple regions.
NBOA respondents are concentrated on the city’s north and northwest sides — City North (45.6%) and City Northwest (30.4%) lead — but every Chicagoland sub-region is represented in the sample.
Number of properties owned or managed
Portfolio size across the Chicagoland area
Nearly half (48.4%) own between 1 and 5 properties; another 36% manage 6-20. The membership is overwhelmingly composed of small-to-mid scale neighborhood owners.
Total rental units owned or managed
Aggregate units across all properties
49.2% own 20 or fewer rental units in total. Combined with portfolios of 21-50 (12.0%), the small-landlord segment represents over 60% of the sample.
Types of properties owned
Share of respondents across property types · multi-select
The classic Chicago two-flat and small apartment building dominate: 64.6% own 2-to-4-unit properties and 58.8% own 5-to-20-unit buildings — the city’s defining neighborhood rental stock.
Operating role
Owner, manager, or both
53.4% are pure property owners; 39.4% are both owner and manager. Pure third-party property management is a minority role (7.2%) — most NBOA members have direct ownership skin in the game.
Operations: Turnover, Vacancy & Collections
Operating performance metrics from the Chicago landlord survey 2026 — anticipated turnover, current vacancy, and rent collection rates — reported overall and broken out by geography to reveal regional disparities in the Chicago rental market.
Anticipated apartment turnover in 2026
Forward-looking estimate by respondent
63.6% expect 10-20% turnover in 2026. A combined 88.3% expect turnover at or below 30% — operating expectations are stable, not chaotic.
Current vacancy across total units
Vacant with no lease pending, today
82% of respondents operate at 5% or below vacancy, with half reporting zero vacancy outright. Chicago neighborhood rentals are running tight.
Average year-to-date collection rate
All respondents
Two-thirds (66.9%) collect more than 95% of expected rent year-to-date; a further 14.9% land in the 91-95% band. Sub-90% collection is a minority experience.
Operating snapshot
Headline figures across the operating block
The 2026 operating picture is one of stable demand, tight occupancy, and strong cash collection. The pressure points show up in regional disparity, not headline averages.
Collection rates by geographic group
Comparison across North/Northwest/Downtown, South/West, and Mixed-location respondents
The geographic story is sharp: 76.6% of North/Northwest/Downtown respondents collect >95% of rent, versus 56.1% in the South/West group. Mixed-location operators land between (57.4%). Regional disparity is the operating story of 2026.
Vacancy rates by geographic group
Same regional comparison applied to current unit availability
The same geographic gap appears in vacancy: 57.7% of North/Northwest/Downtown providers have no vacant units, compared with 43.9% in the South/West group. Strong collections and tight occupancy travel together by region.
Fee Structures
What fees Chicagoland housing providers charge, when they disclose them, and how move-in and administrative fees vary inside and outside the City of Chicago.
Fees charged throughout tenant leases
Multi-select across all respondents
Three fees dominate Chicagoland lease practice: late payment (69.2%), move-in (67.6%), and application fees (64.4%). Pet, key-replacement, and credit-check fees are common follow-ons. Only 3.6% of respondents charge no fees at all.
When fees are disclosed
Stage of leasing process · multi-select
Fee disclosure happens early and often: 58.0% of providers disclose while marketing the unit, and over half (54.7%) at the showing. Disclosure at lease signing (47.3%) is the floor, not the norm.
The conversation around move-in fees and security deposits remains the most consequential operational question — both for respondent revenue and for prospective tenants. The breakouts that follow contrast the practice inside and outside the City of Chicago.
Inside the City of Chicago
Charge a move-in or admin fee?
84.1% of Chicago respondents charge a move-in or admin fee — the dominant practice citywide.
Move-in fee amount per apartment
The modal Chicago move-in fee is $301-$500 (47.3%). A further 23.1% charge $501-$750. Fees under $300 are a minority.
Move-in fee as % of monthly rent
Half (50.0%) of Chicago move-in fees equal less than 25% of one month’s rent; another 39.4% sit between 26% and 50%. Fees that exceed half a month’s rent are rare (2.5%).
Does the move-in fee cover move-out and repair costs?
Chicago properties
The market is nearly split: 52.1% say their move-in fee covers move-out and repair costs; 47.9% say it does not.
If move-in fees were banned, what would you do?
Respondent action if move-in fees were eliminated
If move-in fees were eliminated, 88.8% of respondents would raise rents — 50.8% would raise all rents (including on long-time residents) and 38.0% would raise new rents only. Just 9.6% would absorb the cost, and 1.6% would cut services. The fee is functionally part of the rent.
Outside the City of Chicago
Require a security deposit?
A majority (57.6%) of respondents with properties outside Chicago require a security deposit — the opposite of the Chicago move-in-fee model.
Also charge a move-in / admin fee?
Among those requiring a deposit
Among providers requiring a deposit, 70.8% do not also charge a move-in fee. Outside the city, deposits and fees rarely stack.
Move-in fee amount per apartment
When suburban operators do charge a fee, $301-$500 is again the modal range (37.7%) — similar magnitude to the city, but applied to a smaller share of leases.
Does the move-in fee cover move-out and repair costs?
Properties outside the City of Chicago
58.8% of suburban operators say their move-in fee does not cover move-out costs — those expenses come from the security deposit, consistent with traditional landlord-tenant practice outside the city.
COPA Ordinance Impact: Survey Findings
A new section for the 2026 Chicago housing provider survey examining the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act’s measurable COPA ordinance impact on transactions among respondents who have sold — or attempted to sell — property in a COPA pilot area.
Days the COPA process added to the transaction
Among respondents who sold under COPA
45.5% say COPA added more than 90 days to their transaction; a further 18.2% report 61-90 days of added process. The ordinance materially extends transaction timelines.
Additional legal or administrative costs
Cost incurred because of the ordinance
67.9% of COPA-exposed sellers incurred additional legal or administrative costs. The modal added cost lands in the $1,000-$5,000 range (39.3%), with 14.3% exceeding $5,000.
Less buyer interest in COPA-area property?
51.7% report noticeably fewer interested buyers for their COPA-area property. Including “possibly” responses, two-thirds saw weakened buyer interest.
Did the ordinance make non-COPA property more attractive?
Nearly half (48.4%) say non-COPA property became more attractive as a direct result of the ordinance — a market-distortion signal.
Did COPA interfere with a 1031 exchange?
20% of COPA-exposed sellers report 1031 exchange interference — half of those missed the 45-day identification window specifically because of the COPA process.
Decided not to pursue a purchase in a COPA pilot area?
60.3% of relevant respondents say they decided against a purchase in a COPA pilot area specifically because of the ordinance — direct evidence of a chilling effect on investment.
The COPA findings represent the experience of a smaller subset — only respondents who sold or attempted to sell a property subject to the ordinance. Read these directional signals alongside the broader operating data, not in isolation.
Provider Demographics
Tenure in the rental business, residence relative to portfolio, and respondent demographic composition.
Years providing rental housing
66.0% have been providing rental housing for more than a decade, and 43.9% have been in the business over 20 years. This is a long-tenured, experienced membership.
Where respondents reside
Multi-select
62.1% of NBOA respondents live in the City of Chicago; another 27.3% live in suburban Cook County. The membership is, by and large, made up of local owners with local addresses.
Do you own properties in your home neighborhood?
Just under half (49.2%) own rental property in the same neighborhood where they live — a hyper-local ownership pattern that defines the NBOA member profile.
Respondent race & ethnicity
Multi-select
The respondent base is predominantly White (65.4%), with 12.9% preferring not to answer and the remaining 21.7% spread across Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Multiracial, Asian, and other identifications.
What This Means
The 2026 Chicago housing provider survey describes a Chicagoland neighborhood-rental market that is operationally stable, geographically uneven, and increasingly sensitive to policy changes. This comprehensive Chicago landlord survey reveals headline figures — 66.9% above-95% rent collection, 50.4% zero vacancy, 88.3% expecting moderate or low turnover — that point to a small-portfolio membership operating well.
Underneath those averages, the regional gap is the story to watch: North-side and Northwest-side respondents outperform South/West counterparts by roughly 20 percentage points on the >95% rent-collection threshold. Any city- or state-level rule change that ignores this geographic disparity in the Chicago rental market risks exacerbating it.
On fees, the membership is direct: 88.8% would raise rents if move-in fees were banned. That makes the fee functionally part of housing cost, not separate from it. Policy that targets the fee will reach the rent.
And the new COPA ordinance impact data, while drawn from a small subset, is consistent enough to signal real friction: extended timelines, added costs, reduced buyer interest, and direct investment avoidance. The NBOA membership is asking that future legislation reflect the operational realities documented in this Chicago housing provider survey.
Frequently Asked Questions
What percentage of Chicago landlords report high rent collection rates?
According to the 2026 Chicago housing provider survey, 66.9% of Chicago housing providers report collecting more than 95% of rent consistently, indicating strong rent collection performance among surveyed neighborhood landlords. However, significant regional disparities exist, with North-side and Northwest-side providers outperforming South and West side counterparts by approximately 20 percentage points.
How has the COPA ordinance affected Chicago rental property sales?
The Chicago landlord survey 2026 reveals substantial transaction delays and market chilling effects. Among COPA-exposed sellers, 45.5% report the ordinance added more than 90 days to their transaction timeline, while 67.9% incurred additional legal or administrative costs. Most significantly, 60.3% of relevant respondents decided against purchases in COPA pilot areas specifically because of the ordinance, demonstrating a direct COPA ordinance impact on investment activity.
Are there regional differences in Chicago’s rental market performance?
Yes, pronounced regional disparities exist across the Chicago rental market. The Chicago housing provider survey shows North-side and Northwest-side respondents significantly outperform South and West side providers on key metrics. The geographic divide is the most important story in the data, suggesting that city- or state-level housing policy changes that ignore these disparities risk exacerbating existing inequalities in Chicago’s rental housing ecosystem.
What would happen if Chicago banned move-in fees?
Survey data indicates a direct pass-through effect: 88.8% of respondents say they would raise rents if move-in fees were banned. This suggests the fee is functionally part of overall housing cost rather than a separate charge, meaning policy targeting fees would likely shift costs to rent rather than reduce total housing expenses for tenants.
Who does the NBOA represent?
The Neighborhood Building Owners Alliance (NBOA) represents 11 Chicagoland neighborhood building owners associations, including EUBA, GADA, LDA, LREIC, LPBC, NSBC, RPBG, SSCIA, SSBA, SWHPG, and WSBOA. The membership consists primarily of small, local landlords — 62.1% live in the City of Chicago, with many owning property in their own neighborhoods. 66% have been providing rental housing for more than a decade.
Thank you.
The NBOA has representatives from — and advocates on behalf of — the following Chicagoland neighborhood building owners associations:
- Edgewater Uptown Builders Association (EUBA)
- Greater Austin Development Association (GADA)
- Lakeview Developers Association (LDA)
- Latino Real Estate Investors Council (LREIC)
- Lincoln Park Builders of Chicago (LPBC)
- Northwest Side Builders Coalition (NSBC)
- Rogers Park Builders Group (RPBG)
- South Side Community Investment Association (SSCIA)
- Southside Builders Association (SSBA)
- Southwest Housing Providers Group (SWHPG)
- West Suburban Building Owners Association (WSBOA)
For too long, legislation has been adopted and rules and procedures have been promulgated on the City, County and State level without the input of the neighborhood building owner and developer. As a result, laws have been passed that have proven detrimental and costly not only to building owners and developers, but to building managers, tenants and society at large.
With the assistance of other real estate organizations; state, county and city government; tenant organizations, affordable housing groups and other interested parties, the NBOA hopes to make practical and meaningful changes that will better serve all involved in Chicago’s real estate community.