The first decision is not who buys your portfolio. It is whether your portfolio is one thing or five things. Three to five LA apartment buildings can sell as a single packaged transaction to one buyer, or as separate listings to separate buyers closing on separate days — and the gap between those two paths can move your net proceeds, your tax year, and your buyer pool more than anything else you'll decide. Most owners assume "portfolio" means "one sale." It rarely should.
I've closed 254 transactions across 14 years and $1.41 billion in LA multifamily. Some of those were single buildings. Some were multi-building packages that closed the same day — including two buildings on Gramercy Place that funded into the same afternoon. The portfolio mechanics below come from doing it, not from theorizing about it.
A portfolio sold whole goes to one buyer in one transaction. The appeal is speed, one negotiation, one escrow, and a clean exit. The cost is the discount. Buyers who can absorb a 3-to-5-building package in a single bite are a smaller, more sophisticated group, and they price for the convenience of scale — they expect a package number, not the sum of five retail numbers.
A portfolio sold building-by-building goes to the highest bidder for each asset. A Koreatown 12-unit and a Sherman Oaks 8-unit do not share a buyer; they share an owner. Sold separately, each clears against its own deepest pool. The cost is time, coordination, and the risk that the last building sits while the first three are gone.
The honest tension: selling whole is easier on you and worse on price, almost always. The right answer is usually neither pure path but a sequenced one — and which sequence depends on your buildings, your tax position, and your tolerance for running parallel processes. That same whole-versus-piecemeal calculus is mapped in detail in the sell-whole-vs-piecemeal comparison guide.
This is where portfolio sellers lose money they didn't know was on the table. Measure ULA is an LA City transfer tax owed on qualifying sales above a dollar threshold — and it is owed on the sale price, gain or no gain, 1031 or no 1031.
Here is the mechanic that matters for a portfolio. Measure ULA is assessed per transaction, not per owner. Five LA City buildings sold as five separate transactions are five separate threshold tests. The same five bundled into one aggregated deal is a single, much larger sale price — which can push the whole package into the tax when several of the individual buildings, sold alone, would have sat below the line.
That cuts both ways. Buildings outside LA City — Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena, Santa Monica, Culver City, LA County unincorporated — are not subject to Measure ULA at all. The location of each building, not the size of your portfolio, decides the exposure. Model it per-property before anyone draws up a package.
A single 10-unit building in the Valley draws local operators, 1031 exchangers, and family offices — a deep, competitive field. A packaged 3-to-5 building portfolio draws a narrower, more institutional set: family offices building scale, core-plus private equity, and operators who specifically want to deploy capital in one move. Fewer bidders. Different math. They buy efficiency, and they price for it.
Whether that institutional pool serves you better than a field of individual buyers is the central portfolio question, and it splits along the lines I lay out in the institutional buyer versus family office comparison. A package buyer gives you certainty and speed. Five individual buyers, run as parallel processes, usually give you a higher blended price — if you have the coordination to run them at once without letting any one straggle.
One closing in December and one in January are two different tax years. For an owner facing depreciation recapture and capital gains across several buildings, the calendar is a lever, not a footnote. Stacking all proceeds into a single tax year can stack you into a higher bracket; splitting closings across two years can flatten it.
The same calendar interacts with 1031 exchanges. Each relinquished building starts its own 45-day identification clock and 180-day closing clock the day it sells. Sequence three sales across a few weeks and you are running three overlapping exchange timelines at once — solvable, but only if it's planned before the first building hits escrow, never improvised after. A reverse exchange or a consolidated replacement can simplify it, but the structure has to be chosen up front.
This is the part owners underestimate. Running three or five escrows at once is not three or five times the work of one — it is a different discipline. Each deal has its own buyer, lender, inspection window, estoppel set, loan payoff, and title curative. Left uncoordinated, they drift apart: one closes, one re-trades, one stalls on a lender, and your clean portfolio exit becomes a months-long trickle.
Coordinated, they move as a cohort. Buyers are sequenced so the timelines overlap deliberately. Payoffs and proration are scheduled so closings land where the tax plan wants them. When two buildings can fund the same day, they fund the same day — the two Gramercy Place buildings did exactly that. A typical single LA escrow runs its own timeline; running five of them in formation is the actual job, and it's why the broker you choose for a portfolio matters more than the one you'd choose for a single building.
Start by treating each building as its own asset: its submarket, its buyer pool, its Measure ULA exposure, its tax basis. Then decide where bundling actually helps — usually for speed or for a buyer who genuinely pays up for scale — and where it quietly costs you. Sequence the closings to the tax plan, not to convenience. Run the escrows as a coordinated cohort, not a queue.
What your portfolio is worth as a package versus as five separate sales is a valuation question, and it depends on assets I'd need to see. That's a conversation, not a calculator.
Request a free evaluation of your portfolio — including a per-building versus packaged net-proceeds read and a Measure ULA exposure map across every property →
Should I sell my whole portfolio to one buyer?
Sometimes — when speed and a clean single exit outweigh price, and when a buyer genuinely pays up for scale. More often a sequenced building-by-building process produces a higher blended number. The right call depends on your buildings and your tax position.
Will selling all my buildings in one year raise my taxes?
It can. Stacking every closing into one tax year can push you into a higher bracket on capital gains and depreciation recapture. Splitting closings across two tax years, where the calendar allows, can flatten the burden.
Can multiple buildings close on the same day?
Yes. Coordinated escrows can fund simultaneously — two buildings on Gramercy Place funded the same afternoon. It requires the timelines to be sequenced deliberately from the start, not stitched together at the end.
Michael Sterman is Senior Managing Director Investments at Marcus & Millichap. This is informational, not legal or tax advice — consult specialized counsel for specific Measure ULA and 1031 analysis.
Thinking about selling? Get a no-obligation evaluation on your building.
Request Free Evaluation →