Client case studyCasago YellowstoneIsland Park & West Yellowstone
18 unitsIdaho & MontanaClient since February 2023
Summer 2026 · May to August

The market fell. This portfolio grew.

Island Park/West Yellowstone had a hard summer. The bedroom-matched market added supply and lost 9.0 points of occupancy, finishing with rent per available night down 7.2% and total revenue per available night down 8.1%. Casago Yellowstone grew on both, and gave up barely a point of occupancy while the market gave up nine.

“Pacer has been an extremely positive and cooperative partner for Casago Yellowstone. Their team communicates well, works collaboratively with us, and brings a thoughtful, data-driven approach to revenue strategy. We truly value the partnership and the way our teams work together to produce strong results, even in a challenging market.”

Lisa Robb · Owner, Casago Yellowstone
+4.9%
RentPAR · rent per available room night
market -7.2%
+10.5%
RevPAR · total revenue per available room night
market -8.1%
-1.3 pts
Occupancy · market -9.0 pts
19 pts
of RevPAR separation from the market
The season

A soft summer for the market, a good one here.

Supply grew around this portfolio and demand did not keep up. Every measure of the surrounding market moved backwards. Against that, Casago Yellowstone raised both rent and total revenue per available night, and held occupancy nearly flat while the market shed nine points of it.

RentPAR · Yellowstone
+4.9%
RentPAR · market
-7.2%
RevPAR · Yellowstone
+10.5%
RevPAR · market
-8.1%
Occupancy · Yellowstone
-1.3 pts
Occupancy · market
-9.0 pts
Occupancy is the clearest read on a declining market. The market lost 9.0 points; this portfolio lost 1.3. Holding occupancy while a market sheds it is what allows rate to stick, which is why RentPAR rose 4.9% here against -7.2% across the comp set.

A matched group of 12 homes within the Casago Yellowstone portfolio that were active during both periods, May 1 to August 31, 2026 against the same window in 2025. The portfolio is larger than the matched group; matching is what makes a like-for-like year-over-year comparison possible. All figures are per adjusted available night, net of owner stays and maintenance holds. One property listed three separate ways is excluded, since those listings share availability and would be triple counted. Market is Key Data comp sets matched to each unit's own bedroom count, on the same adjusted basis.

What it took

Holding a calendar that the market could not.

Occupancy

Defended the calendar

-1.3 vs -9.0 pts

When a market loses nine points of occupancy, the default outcome is to lose them with it. This portfolio gave up barely one, which is what kept rate from having to be discounted to chase the shortfall.

Rate

Rate held and grew

+4.9%

Rent per available night rose while the comp set fell 7.2%. In a softening market that gap is the whole job: most operators discount into the decline and give up both.

Approach

Managed home by home

Every home, every date

Pricing decisions are made per property and per date rather than by portfolio-wide rule, which is what lets individual homes hold rate while the market around them discounts.

Method

How these numbers were produced.

Adjusted availability

Every per-night figure divides by nights the home was actually sellable, net of owner stays and maintenance holds, matching how Key Data builds its adjusted metrics.

A matched group

12 homes within the wider Casago Yellowstone portfolio that had real availability in both summers. Homes that joined or left the program are excluded, as is one property listed three ways whose listings share availability.

Settled window

May 1 to August 31, complete in both years, compared against the identical calendar window. No forward book or partial month is included.

What is your season actually worth?

Pacer is a preferred revenue management partner to the Casago franchise network. We will benchmark your portfolio against bedroom-matched market performance and show you what is recoverable, before you make any commitment.

Request a portfolio audit