According to the Esade study, owners who have only one apartment for rent are the majority, although they lost weight between 2019 and 2023 (from 50.1% to 48.2%). 22% have two rental apartments and, at the upper end, 13% have five or more apartments. The think tank's X-ray also shows that –as experts from across the spectrum have been warning for some time– the expectation of what landlords can charge and the social perception of prices is "above" what most tenants pay (some of whom have contracts signed years ago). While the average price of Idealista ads —which is not necessarily what finally remains— is around 12 euros/m2, multi-landlords charge an average of 7.9 €/m2 and, single-landlords, 7.4 €/m2.
The more apartments a landlord accumulates, the more they raise rents, according to Esade
The extraordinary income of "multi-landlords" explains nearly 20% of the price increase in the rental market
22/10/2026 - 08:51 h
-
CAT -
CAST
BarcelonaIf the owner of your apartment has more than one rented property, it is likely that you have noticed the price hike more than the tenant of a landlord who has only one property on the market. In fact, according to a study by the Esade think tank published this Thursday, the more apartments an owner accumulates, the more they increase the monthly payments.
Social polarization around housing has grown as the crisis has worsened. In a context where the discussion oscillates between political bickering and moral considerations, EsadeEcPol warns that, between 2019 and 2023, the price set by "multi-landlords" –who have at least two rented apartments– grew between 3% and 4% more than the increases applied by "mono-landlords," who only had one.
In fact, it is between 2019 and 2023 that the difference between one and the other began to be statistically "significant." If before the pandemic owners with two or more apartments charged 0.8% more than the rest, by 2023 the difference climbed to 3.5%. However, among owners of more than one apartment, the situation was not homogeneous either: rents from large holders —five homes or more— were 4.5% more expensive than rents from mono-landlords, while the difference moderated to 1.3% among those who had two rented properties.
It should be stressed that the study only refers to owners who are natural persons, and excludes companies –including investment funds– and other legal forms. In order to measure the distance between the prices set by each group of owners and the market price, EsadeEcPol has cross-referenced data from the household panel created by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IEF) and that of the Tax Agency.
A limited impact
Despite this trend, the study underscores that the majority of the rise in housing costs responds to the general revaluation of the market, which is "consistent" with the tension between the scarcity of supply and the increase in demand. In other words, the profile of the owners only explains a residual part of the price rise and, therefore, "the [political] measures aimed at multi-landlords act on a small part of the problem," opines the author of the study, Jorge Galindo.
A different question is what impact the behavior of multi-landlords has had on the evolution of rents as a whole. Galindo attributes to these owners "a little less than a fifth" of the market price increase. He warns that "practically all of it is due to the increase in their premium," that is, for what they charge in excess compared to owners with a single apartment for rent, because the weight of multi-landlords in the market as a whole "has practically not changed" in the four years studied.
The profile of the owners, a determining factor
During the period analyzed, there were no restrictions when renewing the contract: under these circumstances, in which the owner has "a higher discretion to set the price," single-property landlords applied increases of 3.8% compared to the previous contract, and multi-property landlords, of 5.2%. The director of EsadeEcPol and author of the study, Jorge Galindo, proposes several scenarios to explain the difference in behavior. Firstly, that owners of more than one apartment usually bought the homes as an investment and, therefore, have chosen the most profitable ones, while among those who only have one, they often inherited it. Secondly, they "reach the new equilibrium price" of the market sooner because they have more ways to do so, while single-property landlords need more time. Thirdly, the one who has a single home "may prefer a stable tenant, even if it means charging a little below market value."
Among these arguments, he rules out that territorial concentration has a significant impact: the difference in prices is more pronounced when multi-property landlords have their apartments scattered throughout the territory. Consequently, Galindo argues that current measures—mainly stressed residential market zones (ZMRT) and price caps—may "not be the most appropriate variable" to address the gap between what owners who only rent one apartment charge and those who rent more.
Instead, Galindo proposes extending personal income tax (IRPF) deductions to owners who rent a habitual residence outside of ZMRT zones, and compensating for "the perceived risk of non-payment and difficulty in recovering the property" that large landlords may have due to not personally knowing all their tenants.
How is the rental stock distributed?
