appreciation vs monthly rental
it makes sense to buy a property in bay are as it appreciates the fastest in bay area. issue us its expensive and rent you get is relatively lower. if you buy investment property in midwest it doesnt appreciate but rent to investment ratio is better. anybody has a comment on this dilemma ?
Historically it appreciated faster. Doesn’t mean that will continue into the future.
For long term rentals, I look for positive monthly cash flow. Like Atinlay mentioned, appreciation is speculation and not guaranteed
Personally I prefer cash flow as I don't plan on ever selling any property I buy (at least not any time soon). The leverage, and tax benefits of a loss on paper help. If I am looking for cash flow I'm looking for more blue collar small multi-family (duplex-4plex etc...)
And if I'm looking for appreciation I go for single family. I'm in Austin, though so not dealing with the Bay Area craziness. But deals here are much harder to come by then they use to be.
Crashed hard in the late 90s. Had to chuckle back then too.
Considering Midwest is a huge place, I can’t answer for all of it. I own in 2 slices of the Midwest: Columbus and Indianapolis. I’ve averaged 10% appreciation in Columbus (Short North/Downtown) & 5% in Indianapolis (Riverside). And I’m not counting the properties I (literally-ish) stole in 2009-2012. Because the appreciation there is just obscene. I don’t know what you folks expect in SF, but I’m very happy with 5% YoY appreciation with a 3% yearly rental bump. Cheers Coasties.
Appreciation is not a guarantee! You need to learn more about the market. You’re literally buying high and hoping for higher. In one of the highest taxes states in the country.
I see it happening for last 25 yrs
That is everywhere. It’s also called “inflation”