Property manager intelligence
Operator IQ identifies the operators worth knowing in Chattanooga, TN-GA MSA. Find property managers with proven lease velocity, stable rent trajectories, and durable tenant retention. Filter by portfolio composition and ownership posture. Every ranking is grounded in first-party listing data and computed against same-cohort peers, not a single market-wide average.
Chattanooga's operator landscape skews toward SFR Independent (29 operators, the largest cohort). SFR Independent leases fastest (32.0 days median DOM vs 25.0 days market-wide). SFR Independent shows the strongest rent trajectory at +0.1% vs comp.
Stars indicate top-percentile performance against same-cohort peers. Gold stars are earned for top-tier performance on a metric; silver stars mark the next tier. Operators are ordered by total gold stars first, then silver, so multi-dimensional performers rank highest. Click any operator for the full scorecard.
Showing 40 of 40 ranked operators. Operators below the data sufficiency threshold are excluded from this view. See Methodology →
51% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
19.0 d
Rent vs comp
+0.1%
Concessions
9%
74% Chattanooga·est. 400–800 managed units
DOM (T12)
29.0 d
Rent vs comp
+6.9%
Concessions
62%
57% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
18.0 d
Rent vs comp
+7.2%
Concessions
20%
68% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
36.5 d
Rent vs comp
+22.8%
Concessions
0%
100% Chattanooga·est. 400–800 managed units
DOM (T12)
6.0 d
Rent vs comp
−2.5%
Concessions
0%
48% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
18.5 d
Rent vs comp
+8.7%
Concessions
52%
35% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
18.5 d
Rent vs comp
−16.6%
Concessions
3%
33% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
48.0 d
Rent vs comp
+22.5%
Concessions
22%
63% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
58.0 d
Rent vs comp
+17.1%
Concessions
0%
52% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
13.0 d
Rent vs comp
+3.4%
Concessions
44%
62% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
25.0 d
Rent vs comp
+5.4%
Concessions
32%
65% Chattanooga·est. 400–800 managed units
DOM (T12)
20.0 d
Rent vs comp
+4.2%
Concessions
14%
100% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
20.0 d
Rent vs comp
+3.4%
Concessions
0%
76% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
32.0 d
Rent vs comp
+0.1%
Concessions
0%
53% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
33.0 d
Rent vs comp
−6.0%
Concessions
8%
100% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
25.0 d
Rent vs comp
−1.4%
Concessions
0%
66% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
24.0 d
Rent vs comp
+13.5%
Concessions
2%
100% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
21.0 d
Rent vs comp
+0.6%
Concessions
0%
93% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
54.0 d
Rent vs comp
+10.4%
Concessions
0%
92% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
22.0 d
Rent vs comp
—
Concessions
0%
36% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
38.5 d
Rent vs comp
—
Concessions
77%
53% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
19.0 d
Rent vs comp
−6.5%
Concessions
2%
74% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
52.0 d
Rent vs comp
—
Concessions
0%
69% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
23.0 d
Rent vs comp
−7.0%
Concessions
0%
55% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
39.0 d
Rent vs comp
+2.4%
Concessions
0%
82% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
26.0 d
Rent vs comp
+3.4%
Concessions
0%
93% Chattanooga·est. 800–1,600 managed units
DOM (T12)
83.0 d
Rent vs comp
−2.1%
Concessions
44%
68% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
26.0 d
Rent vs comp
−19.8%
Concessions
15%
71% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
27.0 d
Rent vs comp
—
Concessions
0%
40% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
29.0 d
Rent vs comp
−3.4%
Concessions
8%
81% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
47.0 d
Rent vs comp
—
Concessions
13%
69% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
44.0 d
Rent vs comp
−4.1%
Concessions
0%
95% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
32.0 d
Rent vs comp
−22.3%
Concessions
0%
60% Chattanooga·est. 200–400 managed units
DOM (T12)
40.0 d
Rent vs comp
−1.5%
Concessions
7%
100% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
39.0 d
Rent vs comp
−1.2%
Concessions
0%
47% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
56.5 d
Rent vs comp
−0.1%
Concessions
23%
77% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
52.0 d
Rent vs comp
−9.4%
Concessions
8%
100% Chattanooga·est. <50 managed units
DOM (T12)
49.0 d
Rent vs comp
−4.8%
Concessions
0%
100% Chattanooga·est. 100–200 managed units
DOM (T12)
59.0 d
Rent vs comp
—
Concessions
0%
96% Chattanooga·est. 50–100 managed units
DOM (T12)
81.0 d
Rent vs comp
−28.5%
Concessions
3%
Quadrant
Each dot represents one observed listing address across all eligible operators in Chattanooga, TN-GA MSAover the trailing 12 months. Color indicates the operator’s quadrant classification. 2,735 addresses plotted across 40 operators.
Watch lists
Operators ranked by trailing-twelve-month median Days on Market within-quadrant. Data sufficiency requires ≥30 listings in trailing 12 months. Within-quadrant ranking requires ≥3 PMs in cohort. Methodology v0.8 · Data as of Aug 20, 2026 · Learn more →
