American Homes 4 Rent (AMH) Q3 2026 Earnings Report, Transcript and Summary

Greetings, and welcome to the AMH Third Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I'd now like to turn the call over to your host, Nick Fromm, Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and thank you for joining us for our third quarter 2026 earnings conference call. With me today are Bryan Smith, Chief Executive Officer; Chris Lau, Chief Financial Officer; and Lincoln Palmer, Chief Operating Officer. Please be advised that this call may include forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this conference call are forward-looking statements that are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in these statements. These risks and other factors that could adversely affect our business and future results are described in our press releases and in our filings with the SEC. All forward-looking statements speak only as of today, November 5, 2026. We assume no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law. A reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures is included in our earnings press release and supplemental information package. As a note, our operating and financial results, including GAAP and non-GAAP measures, are fully detailed in our earnings release and supplemental information package. You can find these documents as well as the SEC reports and the audio webcast replay of this conference call on our website at www.amh.com. With that, I will turn the call over to our CEO, Bryan Smith.

Welcome, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. AMH had another strong quarter, showcasing the power and consistency of our platform. This year's results reflect the efforts of our outstanding team, our continued investments in technology and our strategic capital allocation decisions. Together with healthy demand for high-quality AMH homes, this has enabled us to raise the midpoint of our core FFO per share guidance by $0.02 to $1.97, which represents 5.3% year-over-year growth. As we close out the remainder of the year and transition to 2027, we remain focused on maintaining occupancy to set us up for a strong start to the year. Looking ahead, we continue to see solid demand for our homes even as many households navigate a more challenging economic backdrop. Affordability pressures in the for-sale market remain elevated, driven by mortgage rates near multi-decade highs. This further underscores the value of what AMH provides, a premium single-family living experience for those who want a quality home without the financial burden of homeownership. This value proposition continues to attract and retain a strong high-quality resident base. Now turning to third quarter results. Same-Home average occupied days was 96% and new, renewal and blended lease spreads were 1%, 3.3% and 2.6%, respectively. This drove Same-Home core revenue growth of 2.3%. Together with expenses, Same-Home core NOI growth was 2.5% for the quarter. Turning to October. Occupancy held steady at 96%. Renewals grew at 3.3%, and new lease rate growth remained positive at 0.1%. These results are in line with our expectations, which contemplated a flatter seasonal curve over the course of the year. On the investment front, we remain focused on optimizing the AMH development program. Encouragingly, we are seeing improving initial yields on completed homes. And like we have shared previously, underwritten yields on new land deals remain north of 6%. As a reminder, recycled capital from dispositions continues to be the primary funding source for development. This allows us to strategically reposition the portfolio by selling older assets and adding new high-quality homes with better long-term growth prospects. Notably, the average age of our portfolio today is similar to what it was in 2020. Our top priority is making smart capital decisions in the current cost of capital environment. Along with supporting our long-term development strategy, we continue to take a thoughtful and programmatic approach to share repurchases, deploying another $75 million in the third quarter. This brings our total repurchase activity over the last 12 months to over $460 million, representing nearly 4% of shares and units outstanding. We'll continue to evaluate repurchases alongside other investment opportunities with a focus on maximizing long-term value per share. Turning briefly to the legislative landscape. With the ROAD to Housing Act now signed into law, attention has shifted to the Treasury Department as they complete the rule-making process. We continue to be engaged not only in Washington, but also at the state and local levels. This is a normal course of business for our industry and the primary work of our dedicated government affairs team, which we've had in place for many years. In closing, it has been a strong year for AMH. I would like to thank our teams across the country for their hard work and commitment. Their experience and execution are central to the success of our company. With that, I'll turn it over to Chris.

Thanks, Bryan, and good morning, everyone. Like usual, I'll cover 3 areas in my comments today. First, a review of our quarterly results; second, an update on our balance sheet and recent capital activity; and third, I'll close with commentary around our increased 2026 guidance. Starting off with our operating results. The teams delivered a solid third quarter, generating net income attributable to common shareholders of $82.3 million or $0.23 per diluted share. On an FFO share and unit basis, we generated $0.50 of core FFO, representing 7.4% year-over-year growth and $0.45 of adjusted FFO, representing 7.6% year-over-year growth. In addition to the strong execution this quarter, we've now received the majority of our final property tax values, which have landed better than expectations in several states, notably Texas and Florida. Based on the updated values, we now expect full year 2026 property tax growth to be in the mid-1% area, which has been positively reflected in our updated full year guidance that I'll talk about shortly. Turning to investments. We continued executing on our moderated 2026 development plan, delivering a total of 498 homes to our wholly owned and joint venture portfolios during the quarter. Specifically, for our wholly owned portfolio, we delivered 387 homes for a total investment cost of $156 million. Additionally, during the quarter, we sold 291 homes for total net proceeds of $94 million at an average economic disposition yield in the 4% area. Next, I'd like to quickly turn to our balance sheet and recent capital activity. At the end of the quarter, our net debt, including preferred shares, to adjusted EBITDA was 5.2x. We had $71 million of cash on the balance sheet, and we had a $420 million drawn balance on our $1.25 billion revolving credit facility with no scheduled maturities until 2028. Additionally, during the quarter, we repurchased an incremental 2.4 million common shares for a total of $75 million at an average price of $31.39 per share. Since the fourth quarter of 2025, we have now repurchased 14.9 million common shares, or nearly 4% of our total shares and units outstanding, for a total of $463 million at an average price of $31.12 per share. And next, I'll cover our updated 2026 earnings guidance, which was positively revised in yesterday's earnings press release. Starting with the Same-Home portfolio, recognizing the team's solid execution in this year's healthy leasing environment, we have modestly increased the midpoint of our full year core revenue growth expectations to 2.4%. And contemplating our recent favorable property tax update, we have lowered the midpoint of our full year core expense growth expectation to 1.6%. Collectively, this translates into a 40 basis point increase to the midpoint of our full year Same-Home core NOI growth expectations to 2.8%. And when combined with the continued strong AMH development lease-up activity within the non-Same-Home portfolio, we have increased the midpoint of our full year core FFO per share expectations by $0.02. Our new midpoint of $1.97 per share now reflects the high end of our previous range and represents a year-over-year growth expectation of 5.3%, which further extends AMH's lead over the rest of the residential sector. And before we open the call to your questions, I'd like to share one final thank you to the team for making our success possible. The AMH strategy is working and our results speak for themselves. And we look forward to closing 2026 on a high note as we position the portfolio for success into 2027. And with that, thank you again for your time, and we'll open the call to your questions. Operator?

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Juan Sanabria with BMO Capital Markets.

I'm hoping you can talk a little bit about what drove the revision to top line or same-store revenue guidance this quarter, please?

Juan, Chris here. Perfect place to start us off. The way that I would think about the update to the top line is, just like I mentioned a minute ago in prepared remarks, it's really a reflection of just solid execution by the team and great execution in the healthy leasing environment we've seen over the course of the year and really, in particular, across the diversification of the footprint. And you can really see it across the board with full year blended leasing spreads that are on track to likely land close to maybe a touch below the mid-2s now, that's modestly better than our previous expectations, along with the team accomplishing our goal for this year of flattening the curve, right? And you can see that with occupancy now remaining in the 96% area as we're shouldering into the fourth quarter, keeping us on track for full year occupancy in the high 95s. And the execution didn't stop there. It continued across collections as well, where we're seeing bad debt on a full year basis track a touch better than we were expecting at the start of the year as well. So collectively, all of that translated into the new guidance expectation of 2.4% at the mid.

Our next question comes from the line of Nick Joseph with Citi.

Maybe continuing on that. Obviously, there's been a lot of disruption in the broader housing market as mortgage rates have moved up. So I was hoping you could touch on how that is impacting pricing power and if you're seeing more shadow supply and just kind of the broader housing dynamics and the impact to your portfolio?

Thanks for the question, Nick. This is Lincoln. I'll touch on the shadow supply separately. But in general, we view supply as having peaked in late 2025 for single-family product. That's obviously very highly market dependent, and our views are slightly different on some of those, but it's one of the reasons why our diversified portfolio is so important to us. We continue to be encouraged by the directional movement and absorption of single-family supply broadly across our markets. In fact, this last quarter, we saw that in just about every market with the exception of San Antonio. In some of those markets, the absorption needs to continue in order to get things back into equilibrium where we feel -- we feel a little bit stronger about pricing power. But directionally, things are going very well. As far as the shadow side goes, the recent moves to 7% interest rates, it's possible those aren't finding their way through yet to the movements around that and how that may affect shadow supply. But our overall numbers contemplate any of those homes that are being converted from for sale to for rent back into the rental pool, and that's still declining in most of the markets. So we feel very confident that things are moving in the right direction on the supply side.

Our next question comes from the line of Jamie Feldman with Wells Fargo.

Can you give us an early sense of where you think you are on earn-in heading into '27? And with a better starting occupancy position and what you're seeing in third-party market forecast, do you think we can expect stronger blended rent growth year-over-year?

Sure, Jamie. Chris here. I chuckle a little bit. More than happy to run through some of the building blocks. I'm sure you know what I'm going to say and that it's a little bit too early to be talking definitively. But just a couple of directional thoughts. If you think about the guide for this year, this year's guide likely implies a 2027 earn-in in the, call it, low 1% area, which, as a reminder, is a touch below our '26 earn-in coming into this year, which was closer to the mid-1s. Then as of today, we've talked about this for the past quarter or 2, our view is that loss to lease is in a fairly neutral position across the portfolio. So we don't see it playing much of a role or being a factor in 2027. And then the final variable, to your point, really comes down to market rent growth, where John Burns, for anyone that follows his research, he just recently updated his outlook and his latest outlook is calling for a modest reacceleration of market rent growth in '27. Again, it's still early, but it feels like a small step in the right direction. Like I said, I can't express a full view yet. We'll have obviously more to talk about on the next call, but I have some directional thoughts in the meantime. Hopefully, that's helpful.

Our next question comes from the line of Steve Sakwa with Evercore ISI.

I was just hoping you could maybe talk about some of the -- maybe the weaker markets, particularly on the new rent side. I guess you -- somebody had called out San Antonio as just maybe one market that's been softer. But I guess, given the elevated mortgage rates, maybe just talk about some of the dynamics you're seeing on the new lease side and some of those weaker markets like San Antonio or Phoenix?

Thanks, Steve. Lincoln here again. I think the rate power that we're seeing in some of these markets, or the lack thereof, to your point, on the San Antonio and some of the other places is largely driven by the supply and inventory picture that we talked about before. Again, that's improving in a lot of places. One notable change that we saw is that across all of our Florida markets, that got better across all of Texas, except for San Antonio, that got better and Phoenix actually got better on a year-over-year basis. So it's encouraging that we're moving in the right direction. Again, those are a few of the markets that I would also say we need to continue to absorb some inventory. And as we do that, we'll be able to, I think, see a little bit more pricing power. But directionally, we're getting there. Not quite there yet on the overall supply.

Our next question comes from the line of Haendel St. Juste with Mizuho Securities.

This is Mike on with Haendel at Mizuho. Can you discuss what's driving the uptick in development yields and how that may impact your expectations for new projects being started today?

Yes. Thank you. This is Bryan. The development yield, the initial yields on development deliveries at the beginning of the year, we were expecting somewhere in the range of 5.3% going in yields. And we've seen a slight improvement of that as we migrated through the third quarter. It's due to a couple of different factors. First of all, our team has done an outstanding job of controlling the vertical development costs. They were flat year-over-year, in fact, flat for the last 2 years in an environment where we saw tariffs and noise and a lot of other factors that we had to compete with -- with our strong purchasing department. So we're delivering on plan. We're delivering efficiently. And there are some initiatives that we put into place. We talked about them on the last call through pre-leasing and some really good handoffs that we have from development into operations that are allowing us to capture maybe a little bit more rent. So we're happy with the way rents have gone on recent deliveries, and we're happy with the investment cost basis coming in. And that's the basis for that improvement. If you look forward into the new deals that we're seeing, we anticipate further improvement in those yields. As I mentioned in my prepared remarks, we're backfilling on a limited basis into the pipeline deals that have a superior yield profile into the 6s. And we're achieving that through a combination of different things, maintaining good cost controls on the vertical construction side. There's some optimization that we're incorporating in. It's one of the benefits of having internal development. There's constant improvement and feedback from operations and from our residents, in fact. So we're delivering a more efficient product going forward as well. And then the pre-leasing initiative is fantastic, as I mentioned before. And finally, there's just great demand for this superior product in this marketplace, especially in the context of the cost to own increasing as it has of late.

Our next question comes from the line of Jeff Spector with Bank of America.

Chris, I have a follow-up on Jamie's question and your comment on the earn-in into '27 slightly lower than the earn-in entering '26. And just reconciling that to our conversation at our September conference where you talked about potential same-store NOI growth to improve in '27, including the benefit of entering the year with better occupancy. Can you reconcile those comments, please?

Sure, Jeff. There's a couple of different things going on there. Keep in mind, one, definitely too early to express a formal view on next year at this point. Market rent growth and earn-in are just a couple of pieces of it. I shared the view on Burns's latest thoughts in terms of earn-in -- or I mean, sorry, market rent growth direction for 2027. Another variable is going to be occupancy. One of the things I think we would have talked about at the conference is the opportunity presented by coming into '27 in a stronger occupancy position than we came into '26 in. If you recall this year, as you think about the building blocks of '26 revenue growth, one of the things that we were dealing with was battling a little bit of a year-over-year occupancy headwind just given the position that we came into this year in with occupancy comping down 20 to 25 basis points or so. Again, too early to comment specifically, but the objective for this year in terms of flattening of the curve and positioning the portfolio for strength exiting '26 is to come into '27 in a stable and full occupancy position, which is beneficial from an occupancy comp perspective and it also enables us to begin capturing the full strength of spring much earlier in the year than, quite frankly, we were able to in '26 as we are still solving and building occupancy into the beginning of this year. So long-winded way of saying there's a lot of different pieces in there. One of the things we would have talked about at the conference also is the interplay with expenses, where the team has been doing a great job controlling the controllables this year that we fully expect to continue into '27 as well, as just another ingredient of the view in terms of year-over-year NOI opportunity.

Our next question comes from the line of Adam Kramer with Morgan Stanley.

I wanted to ask about capital allocation here, obviously, recognizing the continued buyback activity. But just as you're sort of thinking about where you are today from a leverage perspective, I think you had some borrowings on the revolver as well. So just maybe tie through sort of what's going on capital allocation-wise and where priorities sit today and sort of going forward.

Adam, Chris here. Overall, I would say capital allocation and buyback approaches and strategy is really no different than our view and narrative over the past 12 months or so. Recall that we've taken a very balanced approach this year from a capital plan perspective, balancing continuity in the development program, albeit on a more moderated basis in terms of general volume and capital consumption for this year, recognizing where we're at from a capital perspective, but also creating and freeing up capacity for other opportunities like buybacks. On the topic of buybacks, no different than we've talked about before. We absolutely believe in the business, and we see tremendous value in the stock at these levels or at least where we've been trading over the course of the third quarter. And we have been programmatically capturing that value via share repurchase activity every single quarter for the past year at this point. Like we mentioned in the prepared remarks, we've now repurchased over $460 million of stock, which is pushing close to 4% of total shares and units outstanding. But to my point about believing in the business, very importantly, we especially believe in the business over the long term. And so as we think about broader capital allocation, it's really important that we've been able to balance that healthy level of share repurchases alongside continuity in the moderated development program that is mission-critical that we keep in motion for the long term.

Our next question comes from the line of Jason Wayne with Barclays.

Just as you look at the development pipeline heading into '27, what determines whether you keep the current moderated pace? Or is there anything that can make you kind of lean back into starts?

Jason, this is Bryan. The pace that we have set right now, as we mentioned earlier this year and continue with the same message is that we're maintaining continuity in it, and we're match funding that development program through our disposition program. So it's a pretty good balance as it sits today. Obviously, we look forward to a better cost of capital environment. We're doing everything we can on the yield side, delivering high-quality products. There's efficiencies that are coming in. I talked earlier about some of the opportunities we're seeing to push yields north into the 6s. It's just really just a function on relative cost of capital. But at the current pace that we delivered into '26, we're maintaining continuity in the long-term prospects of the development program.

Our next question comes from the line of Jesse Lederman with Zelman & Associates.

Follow-up on the development platform question. Based on the guide, it implies the fourth quarter deliveries at the high end of the range would be only about 100 homes, which, of course, for the wholly owned portfolio, which should be the lowest quarterly run rate since the program began. So also kind of curious how you are maintaining operating efficiency at that kind of run rate and if that says anything about where you might enter the year into '27, not looking for guide, but understanding there's a lot of moving pieces with you seemingly reentering the land market and also having 7,000-plus lots, kind of would suggest you'd like to work through those a bit and add to the portfolio. But of course, the implied pace in the fourth quarter is particularly low. So I would love your thoughts.

Sure. Jesse, Chris here. I can start and then hand over to Bryan. In terms of the fourth quarter pace, you're definitely correct in terms of the level of volume implied in the fourth quarter. I would keep in mind that, that very much is by design. We talked about this at the start of the year and the objective to really front-load this year's deliveries into the first half of the year to better align those deliveries with the leasing season. So by design, we are seeing a moderation in deliveries into the slower time from a leasing perspective in the back half of the year, in particular, the fourth quarter. With that said, based on the way that we're tracking right now, in particular, in terms of balance sheet deliveries, it wouldn't surprise me if we're probably a little bit closer to the high end of that range. But in terms of directional volume by quarter, the moderation in the back part of the year, very much intentional to align with the leasing season.

Yes, Jesse, this is Bryan. You've identified one of the key components to -- or one of the advantages to owning an internal development program, and it's matching those deliveries to levels of demand. You can see it in the way that we're pre-leasing these houses as well. On the last call, I talked about second half deliveries, we were already 40% pre-leased. And if you look at the homes that we're going to be delivering in the balance of the year, that number is in excess of 50%. So, the team has done a really good job of matching deliveries to when -- to the higher move-out periods to areas where we might have a little bit better pricing activity as well. But it's one of the nuances that is a clear benefit to owning an internal development program.

Our next question comes from the line of David Segall with Green Street.

I'm curious why did the volume of home sales slow down in the quarter? Are you mostly through the portfolio pruning exercise? And is there any inclination to reramp the home sales pace back up to what you have been doing in the last couple of quarters?

Sure. David, Chris here again. And interestingly, the response is actually fairly similar to the last question in terms of timing of development deliveries. You may recall that at the start of the year, we talked also about the intentional push to front-load disposition activity earlier in the calendar year for 2 reasons: one, to align that activity a little bit more with the spring selling season; and then two, capture the benefit of that capital recycling earlier in the year. That has been working well. If you recall, actually, one of the drivers to the upside to our full year guide in the second quarter was even better execution in terms of the timing of that disposition activity earlier in the year, which by design naturally will taper a little bit in the back part of the year based on how we set up the plan. I would say, overall, activity into third and beginning of fourth quarter, very much going according to plan. I would remind that also, we're even outperforming our expectations as of the start of the year. I think we started this year's disposition outlook in the $400 million to $600 million range. And as we can see on a year-to-date basis, we're very much tracking towards the upper half of that range.

Our next question comes from the line of Michael Goldsmith with UBS.

You've talked about elevated mortgage rates supporting the relative affordability of renting. But if we ultimately get back to a more normalized for-sale housing market with lower mortgage rates and higher transaction volumes, how do you think that affects pricing power for single-family rentals? And does greater movement into homeownership become a meaningful headwind? Or is that offset by increased household mobility?

Yes. Thanks, Michael. Appreciate the question. I think one of the things you've highlighted there that's very important in the position that we've taken is that mobility is the tide that floats all boats when it comes to real estate movement. That's been fairly stagnant for the last, call it, year or 2 as people have stayed in place around this higher mortgage rate environment. We've also talked about the idea that the mortgage rates and the move-outs to buy and the affordability, it has an impact on our portfolio, but it may not be as sensitive as you would assume. Now that a large portion, and in fact, I'd say a vast portion of our residents choose to rent because of the value, because of the platform, because of life changes or life decisions that make it a better choice for them than purchasing. And that tends to remain fairly stable. As far as interest rates getting back to something more affordable, in the short to midterm, it doesn't look like that probably those are going to move to the extent that it would close that gap meaningfully. And if you took it from the price side, it would be the same thing. You're talking maybe 30% declines in overall prices. So we're comfortable where we are today, given the fact that people are finding value in the platform. We're providing a great option for people in this environment where it is challenging from an affordability standpoint. We're giving them a product that solves their needs. Our move-out to buy has not changed significantly as we've gone through this period of higher interest rates. Since the movements initially in 2022, we've fluctuated right around that 30% range on the move-out to buy, and that's about where we sit today, so.

Our next question comes from the line of Peter Abramowitz with Deutsche Bank.

Just wanted to ask, certainly, you've had a pretty successful year in terms of operations and expense management. Any initial thoughts you could share on the expense outlook in 2027? And just specifically any of the moving pieces on the control or noncontrollable side that we should be thinking about as we sharpen up our models for '27?

Sure. Peter, Chris here. Yes, I can try directionally a bit. Obviously, can't get too detailed. But like I mentioned in prepared remarks, property taxes have now moderated well below long-term averages. Current levels are actually tracking at company record lows. And I wouldn't probably not prudent to count on property taxes running at back-to-back record low type of years. But we do know that home price appreciation is likely going to stay muted at least for the immediate future that potentially sets up for another encouraging/cooperative property tax year in '27. Sticking on the lesser kind of controllables, definitely too early to say anything about insurance. I'll actually be in the London market next month working on our '27 renewal. But needless to say, we are very pleased with this year's renewal and the rate reduction we saw towards the beginning of this year. And then to your point on controllables, as always, the team remains hyper-focused on controlling those controllables. Needless to say, they did a fantastic job this year, and we would fully expect them to continue that same level of focus and execution into next year as well.

Our next question comes from the line of Brad Heffern with RBC Capital Markets.

On development yields, what's the time line that we should expect to see those start to rise? I assume if these 6% projects are going into the land bank, that probably takes several years. So should we expect to see just a gradual rise over the next few years? Or is there some other way to think about it?

Brad, this is Bryan. We're starting to see some of them come through now, I mean, at a small level. The nature of land in that pipeline has started to shift a little bit. Historically, we started with raw land. And now we're seeing some really nice finished lot opportunities, which would compress that holding period to the point where we could close on the land and start building very quickly. So there's some timing changes that is a result -- as a result of the current for-sale housing market and the willingness of some of the national builders to sell portions of the well-located developments that we target. So we're seeing some of that coming in at a very small level. Over time, we would expect to migrate to the new profile that I talked about in terms of some optimization on floor plans and so forth. But it will provide support for improving yields over time. It's not going to move the needle significantly for a little bit as we work through the existing pipeline.

Our next question comes from the line of Buck Horne with Raymond James.

I kind of want to follow up on that a little bit further, just because we're seeing some homebuilders starting to convert some of their finished inventory kind of pushing that through to certain land banks and even converting some communities that were originally probably built for sale and they're going to build them out now as build for rent. So are you seeing that as an opportunity or as potential increased competition going into '27, some of that accidental builder inventory getting converted to SFR property?

Thanks, Buck. This is Bryan. We are seeing some nice opportunities. And there's -- anecdotally, we're seeing some prominent builders acknowledging that by selling lots to us on their communities, at least a portion of some of their larger communities that they're not introducing a direct-for-sale competitor in their own backyard. So there's some strategic benefits to them offering those types of assets. Our land narrative, if you go back over the past couple of years, we've always been asked about the state of the land market. And land prices went down in the C and B- locations, which really isn't our target. What we're really pleased to see now though is the well-located assets, the portions of the communities like you mentioned being offered to us is a new thing and it gives us a lot of optimism as to yield improvement over time. With regards to conversion into additional build-to-rent product, there may be some here or there. But what a lot of people found over the past couple of years is they realize the importance of having the operating platform to support that build-to-rent initiative. Going back to some of my comments earlier on the success that we've had in leasing up the new deliveries, I talked about pre-leasing efforts. I talked about delivery cadence matching demand. And I want to add one other fact, too. We're doing all this without the use of concessions, which is very unusual in this market. If you look at some of the other competing product that may be a little bit further out that might be attached, it has a very different lease-up profile than what we have. And I think a lot of the builders are recognizing the importance of that operating platform. So we're not seeing a lot of competition on that side, but there are some new barriers, I would say, on the operating side that could protect us going forward.

Our next question comes from the line of Jamie Feldman with Wells Fargo.

Just a quick follow-up. I know we've talked about since the ROAD to Housing Act was passed, just potential portfolio sales or just smaller competitors that maybe are finding or may decide they don't want to stay in the business. Just can you give an update on that? I think it's been a little quieter than maybe we had thought. Just what you're seeing on that front?

Yes, Jamie, this is Bryan. It has been relatively quiet. The conversations are happening, but there really aren't any deals that we've seen that were a good fit for us. As I discussed on the last earnings call, in terms of a time horizon, we were thinking 12 to 18 months as the final rulemaking occurs on the ROAD to Housing Act and people evaluate their potential growth channels. And as I mentioned in the last response, really recognizing the difficulty of lease-up and managing these assets. So we're still optimistic. We don't have anything to talk about now. But in terms of the time horizon, our view is that it's similar to what we talked about last quarter. It's still a year plus out. But we do look forward to evaluating those opportunities and -- as we discussed in the past, with portfolio buys, getting that lift by putting them on our operating platform puts us in a really nice position. And then finally, we have a platform that can solve a lot of the sellers' problems, too, from a disposition or asset management perspective.

Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes our question-and-answer session. I'll turn the floor back to management for final comments.

Thank you for your time today. We appreciate your continued interest in AMH and look forward to seeing many of you at NAREIT in a couple of weeks. Thank you.

Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.