Review the current shortlist
Start with the three priority properties below. Priority means diligence sequence, not a purchase recommendation.
Investor decision guide / Waco, Texas
Start with the decision, then drill into the evidence
This site is designed to help a capital partner quickly understand which properties deserve attention, why they rank where they do, what assumptions drive the economics, and what still must be verified.
Use the site in four steps
See the important differences →
Compare price, configuration, rent support, conflicts, and missing seller evidence on the same basis.
Change the assumptions →
Test rent and operating assumptions without changing the underlying research record.
Challenge a claim →
Open the source and evidence layer when you want to understand why a number is stated, estimated, conflicted, derived, or unknown.
6Opportunities tracked
3Current shortlist priorities
2Watch candidates
1Separate-mandate asset sets
Current shortlist
Research as of 2026-09-05. Read the ranking rationale and the first unresolved gate before relying on any economics.
Priority 1
2601–2603 Summer Ave
Current ask
Apparent units
4Dwelling units
LISTING-STATEDCONFLICT FLAG
Why we believe this
Four physical units are strongly supported by current marketing; assessor-derived characteristics conflict and legal use is unknown.
View sourceView sourceYear built: 1949 · provenance
1949Year
LISTING-STATED
Sources, caveats & notes
Consistent secondary sources; direct authoritative record not archived.
View sourceView sourceSupported range$3,650–$4,300
$3,650$4,300
Total rent evidence
$3,650–$4,300USD per month
ESTIMATED
Why we believe this
Asking-rent-based stabilized range; the range is more important than the midpoint.
View source$3,900–$4,000USD per month
ESTIMATED
Supported range$725–$900
$725$900
Supported range$1,100–$1,250
$1,100$1,250
First unresolved question
Are all four marketed dwelling units lawful, lawful-nonconforming, or otherwise authorized?
Why it ranks
Priority 1 because public verification strengthened the four-unit configuration and the itemized rent-comp set materially improved the rent thesis. The ranking remains provisional until lawful four-unit use and actual rents are established.
What could change the case
- Marketed unit count: Four physical units are strongly supported by current marketing; assessor-derived characteristics conflict and legal use is unknown.
What the seller must prove
- Current rent roll
What we should verify next
- McLennan CAD account sheet, ownership, and exemptions
Priority 2
3206 N 20th A St
Current ask
$289,900USD
LISTING-STATED
Apparent units
2Dwelling units
DERIVED
Why we believe this
Sum of marketed unit mix. Legal two-unit status remains unverified.
View sourceView sourceYear built: 2020 · provenance
2020Year
LISTING-STATED
Sources, caveats & notes
Strongly corroborated secondary field; direct record not archived.
View sourceView sourceSupported range$1,300–$1,500
$1,300$1,500
First unresolved question
Does title and deed evidence confirm that both units and the entire parcel are conveyed?
Why it ranks
Priority 2 because public verification materially reduced the earlier sale-scope concern and now strongly supports the current offering as the whole duplex. Title/conveyance, authoritative area, legal two-unit status, and executed rents still gate reliance.
What could change the case
- Building area: Material discrepancy requires direct CAD/plans, survey, appraisal, or professional measurement.
What the seller must prove
- Written whole-duplex conveyance confirmation
What we should verify next
- Direct McLennan CAD parcel record
Priority 3
1200–1202 N 9th St
Current ask
Apparent units
2Dwelling units
LISTING-STATED
Why we believe this
Physical duplex configuration is strongly supported; legal use remains unknown.
View sourceView sourceYear built: 1922 · provenance
1922Year
LISTING-STATED
Sources, caveats & notes
Strong secondary corroboration; direct authoritative record not archived.
View sourceView sourceSupported range$1,995–$2,575
$1,995$2,575
First unresolved question
Which parcel/account identifier controls?
Why it ranks
Priority 3 because the physical duplex configuration is strongly supported and the listing-stated rents are plausible from current asking-rent context. Lease expirations, address-to-rent mapping, parcel reconciliation, and lawful duplex use still gate owner occupancy.
What could change the case
- Parcel identifier: Do not treat the identifiers as equivalent; direct CAD reconciliation is required.
What the seller must prove
- Both executed leases
What we should verify next
- Direct McLennan CAD account and parcel identifier
Watch list & separate mandate
2208 Cumberland Ave
What is the exact physical bedroom/bathroom schedule by unit?
3412 Brook Cir
What is the direct CAD parcel identifier?
3000 Ethel six-unit portfolio
What are the exact three asset addresses and parcel/title relationships?
What still prevents an investment decision?
Test the assumptions →Several acquisition-critical inputs are still unknown.
Executed rents, legal use, property-specific taxes and insurance, utilities, immediate CapEx, and the investor hurdle still require evidence or an explicit investor decision. Recurring reserves shown in scenarios are operating reserves, not total cash required to close.