Skip to content

Let's keep in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter for timely insights and actionable tips on your real estate journey.

By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions
BPCON2026 Orlando

October 2 - 4 Early Bird tickets are now ON SALE. Purchase your tickets today and save $100!

Get tickets
BPCON2026 Orlando

October 2 - 4 Early Bird tickets are now ON SALE. Purchase your tickets today and save $100!

Get tickets
Followed Discussions Followed Categories Followed People Followed Locations
Wholesaling
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated 21 days ago on .

User Stats

80
Posts
14
Votes
Chris Arnold
  • Investor
  • Nationwide
14
Votes |
80
Posts

Are skip trace results getting worse, or are we just using them wrong?

Chris Arnold
  • Investor
  • Nationwide
Posted

I’ve been seeing more conversations lately around skip tracing quality, and I’m curious how others are thinking about it.

A lot of people seem frustrated because they’ll run a list, get multiple phone numbers back, and still waste a ton of time trying to figure out which numbers are actually worth calling.

So I’m wondering if the issue is always the skip trace provider itself… or if part of the problem is what happens after the data comes back.

For example:

  • Are the numbers actually tied to the right owner?
  • Is the owner match clean or messy?
  • Is it an individual owner or an LLC/trust?
  • Are the top numbers mobile/wireless?
  • Is there any confidence ranking, or just a data dump?

I’m starting to think the raw skip trace is only half the equation.

The other half is having a process to clean, score, and prioritize the results before a caller starts working the list.

Curious what others are seeing:

Are your biggest skip trace issues coming from bad data, bad prioritization, or both?