Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Why Investors are Flocking to Student Housing


Purpose-built student housing has matured into an institutionally acceptable asset class.

ONCE CONSIDERED a niche subset of the rental housing sector, purpose-built student housing (PBSH) has matured into an institutionally acceptable asset class. A large and increasingly college-bound population of young adults, set against a backdrop of underinvestment in on-campus housing, have together created a housing shortage for college students in many markets. Developers have been seeking to fill this with off-campus student housing.

A Unique Product

The key differentiator between PBSH and traditional apartments is the leasing model. PBSH leases by the bed, not the unit. If a roommate decides to drop out at winter break, the remaining roommate — and his or her parents — are not on the hook for the entire amount of the unit’s rent, only for their respective portion. A typical unit consists of three bedrooms and three bathrooms, as well as a shared kitchen and living-dining area.

Another differentiator is the leasing cycle. Generally, leases are based on a 50-week time frame, payable in 12 monthly installments. This allows for the annual “turn” ahead of the start of the academic year, when most tenants move out, giving the owner/operator just two weeks to complete needed repairs and maintenance before new tenants move in. Thus, unlike a traditional apartment that can be rented any time, a PBSH community that starts the school year with an empty bed will likely see it remain empty for the entire coming year. On the flip side, however, is the high visibility of cash flows. With tenants in place by the start of the school year, forward 12-month revenue is essentially locked in.

With steady demand year-over-year and limited comparable competing product, net operating income (NOI) annual growth produced by stabilized assets owned for more than one year (same-store) has remained in a stable range of 1 to 5 percent over the past five years. Thus, while it did not enjoy the double-digit growth seen in the apartment sector during the economic recovery, PBSH was likewise shielded from declining NOI during the downturn.

Bill Bayless, CEO of publicly traded American Campus Communities (ACC), often cites in his investor presentations the fact that ACC has produced 11 consecutive years of positive same-store NOI growth, even through the Great Recession. That track record dates back to the company’s initial public offering in 2004, a stellar track record by any measure.

Institutional Investment Increases

This predictability of cash flows and recession resilience is attracting increasing institutional investment into PBSH, particularly at a time when other real estate sectors may be viewed as being closer to the end of the cycle. For example, the two largest transactions last year each exceeded $1 billion, and neither of the two public REITs involved in PBSH were among the buyers.

Chicago-based private equity firm Harrison Street Real Estate Capital LLC acquired the assets of Campus Crest Communities, which had been one of only three publicly traded REITs specializing in PBSH, in a roughly $2 billion deal. Similarly, Scion Group, also based in Chicago, formed a joint venture with equity partners Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and GIC Real Estate to acquire a portfolio of approximately 11,000 beds serving 18 campuses from University House Communities Group in a deal valued at about $1.4 billion. Despite its size, this joint venture has remaining capacity to continue making acquisitions.

Commenting on the influx of capital into PBSH, Dorothy Jackman, managing director at Colliers International and a broker specializing in student housing transactions, notes that cross-border dollars account for 40 percent of total sales year to date, up from just 2 percent in 2013.

Yet, these two transactions are the exception in PBSH, not the norm. Justin Glasgow, who specializes in student housing at Cushman & Wakefield, says PBSH has “only a few well-capitalized, fully integrated owner/operators and a small number of PBSH-focused equity capital sources. The result is a relatively small sector with just a handful of large investors funding multiple competitors. We see a significant shift among investors interested in the space, both traditional and nontraditional, to partner on an exclusive or near exclusive basis to get involved.”

Not surprisingly, the impact of increased institutional investment has been compressing cap rates, in particular closing what had been a historical spread of 50 to 75 basis points above traditional multifamily housing.

This has compelled the largest players to begin recycling capital in larger volumes. In late 2016, ACC sold a portfolio of roughly 12,000 beds in a transaction exceeding $500 million, at a reported 6.1 percent average going in economic cap rate, calculated using NOI adjusted for recurring capital expense and management fees. Proceeds, along with those of asset sales earlier in the year, are being redeployed into the company’s development pipeline, currently projected to deliver $600 million worth of assets by the start of the 2017/2018 academic year and another approximately $230 million already underway for 2018/2019. With development yields still offering an approximately 150 bps spread to acquisition cap rates, it is logical to see the dominant players weighting capital allocation more heavily toward development.

The more relevant question for these players, rather than acquisition versus development, becomes where to focus development investments. For the two publicly traded REITs, ACC and Education Realty Trust (EDR), that answer brings the story full circle.

A New Model

The emerging trend in PBSH, led by these two companies, is the public-private partnership model. REITs are partnering with universities to replace aging on-campus student housing and add new housing capacity on campus. In the last five years, such investment by the two companies has grown from zero to $2 billion. Their respective operational track records, financial transparency and access to the spectrum of options in the capital markets position them as a duopoly to capture this growing opportunity set.

The university gets new housing, helping it attract the best students and win the matriculation battle, without drawing on its own balance sheet. The companies add assets to their portfolios — assets that have even lower leasing risk and thus more stable cash flows than their off-campus student housing assets.

Key terms of such partnerships typically include a long-term ground lease exceeding 50 years, often with multiple 10-year renewal options; noncompete provisions; collaborative marketing efforts; and ground lease payments by the developer that are adjusted based on how much non-revenue generating space the university wants in the structure, such as classrooms or faculty offices.

With the public REITs weighting capital allocation more heavily to on-campus development, some smaller private players see a window of opportunity to ramp up acquisition volume. In their view, the REITs are moving to a quasi-infrastructure business model and effectively ceding their leadership as industry consolidators. “That’s just nonsense,” says Randy Churchey, CEO of EDR. “Looking back over the last decade, two-thirds of the REITs’ growth has come from acquisitions, and I suspect when we look back 10 years from now, the same will still be true.”


Article originally published here.


Offering Disclosure:
The contents of this communication: (i) do not constitute an offer of securities or a solicitation of an offer to buy securities, (ii) offers can be made only by the confidential Private Placement Memorandum (the “PPM”) which is available upon request, (iii) do not and cannot replace the PPM and is qualified in its entirety by the PPM, and (iv) may not be relied upon in making an investment decision related to any investment offering by an issuer, or any affiliate, or partner thereof (“Issuer”). All potential investors must read the PPM and no person may invest without acknowledging receipt and complete review of the PPM. With respect to any “targeted” goals and performance levels outlined herein, these do not constitute a promise of performance, nor is there any assurance that the investment objectives of any program will be attained. All investments carry the risk of loss of some or all of the principal invested. These “targeted” factors are based upon reasonable assumptions more fully outlined in the Offering Documents/ PPM for the respective offering. Consult the PPM for investment conditions, risk factors, minimum requirements, fees and expenses and other pertinent information with respect to any investment. These investment opportunities have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933 and are being offered pursuant to an exemption therefrom and from applicable state securities laws. All offerings are intended only for accredited investors unless otherwise specified. Past performance are no guarantee of future results. All information is subject to change. You should always consult a tax professional prior to investing. Investment offerings and investment decisions may only be made on the basis of a confidential private placement memorandum issued by Issuer, or one of its partner/issuers. Issuer does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information contained herein. Thank you for your cooperation.

Securities offered through Wealthforge, LLC Member: FINRA/SIPC. Only available in states whereWealthforge, LLC is registered. Wealthforge is not affiliated with any other entities identified in this communication.

Real Estate Risk Disclosure:
  • There is no guarantee that any strategy will be successful or achieve investment objectives including, among other things, profits, distributions, tax benefits, exit strategy, etc.;
  • Potential for property value loss – All real estate investments have the potential to lose value during the life of the investments;
  • Change of tax status – The income stream and depreciation schedule for any investment property may affect the property owner’s income bracket and/or tax status. An unfavorable tax ruling may cancel deferral of capital gains and result in immediate tax liabilities;
  • Potential for foreclosure – All financed real estate investments have potential for foreclosure;
  • Illiquidity – These assets are commonly offered through private placement offerings and are illiquid securities. Private Placements are Speculative.
  • There is no secondary market for these investments;
  • Private placements carry a high degree of risk
  • Reduction or Elimination of Monthly Cash Flow Distributions – Like any investment in real estate, if a property unexpectedly loses tenants or sustains substantial damage, there is potential for suspension of cash flow distributions;
  • Impact of fees/expenses – Costs associated with the transaction may impact investors’ returns and may outweigh the tax benefits;
  • Stated tax benefits – Any stated tax benefits are not guaranteed and are subject to changes in the tax code. Speak to your tax professional prior to investing.

Investor Portal