Live data from Hacker News

Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

tinkerdeck.com

21–30 of 76 posts

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#21
A major aspect of successful real estate investing involves understanding your particular market and doing the legwork to find value. You completely lose that signal when you assess the entire market in aggregate like this.

I’m paying far less on my mortgage than I would on rent in my nice neighborhood, based partly on luck, partly on finding a good opportunity, and partly on locking in my housing costs while the rent around me steadily increases.

Aggregate analyses aside, I have a hard time believing that a mortgage will generally be worse as an investment than renting in an era where algorithms are deployed to push rents as high as possible, as often as possible.

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#22

I'd point out that the data for homes is averaged nationally. Historically, there have been Good Places and Bad Places to buy a home. Home price growth in in-demand coastal areas is very different than in rural areas. In the US, "Flyover states" I'm sure skew this number heavily. Part of this is captured by the Volatility Index mentioned > Individual houses are 4x the volatility of a housing index, close to the same…

"You'll never get forced out because your landlord wants to sell."

Where I live, the highest source of inflation for me has been property taxes. It's almost as if my landlord wants me to sell.

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#23

Okay, somebody help me out here. Maybe I'm missing something, but the basic equation is that you as tenant are paying the landlords costs plus their profit. How can renting ever be cheaper than buying?

I suppose depends on the ownership structure of housing stock. If it is mostly repaid mortgages, eg. inherited housing or investment stock, then the rental need not be tied to mortgage costs, but rather investment yield, which may be lower.

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#24

I'd point out that the data for homes is averaged nationally. Historically, there have been Good Places and Bad Places to buy a home. Home price growth in in-demand coastal areas is very different than in rural areas. In the US, "Flyover states" I'm sure skew this number heavily. Part of this is captured by the Volatility Index mentioned > Individual houses are 4x the volatility of a housing index, close to the same…

You can filter for SF/NYC home appreciation in the tool at the bottom of the post to see the difference between in-demand areas and overall.

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#25

Okay, somebody help me out here. Maybe I'm missing something, but the basic equation is that you as tenant are paying the landlords costs plus their profit. How can renting ever be cheaper than buying?

Because you, as someone who is buying a $500k house with 20% down in 2025, are going to have much higher costs than your landlord, who bought it for $100k in 1995 and has already paid it off.

Bake in the fact that many rented houses today were either purchased or refinanced with the historic-low interest rates of ~2021, and there is really just a time difference between someone with pre-existing capital to invest years ago that you didn't have.

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#26
post #9

One thing this seems to ignore -- a mortgage gives you _leverage_ for an investment. Is any bank going to loan you hundreds of thousands of dollars to invest in the S&P?

The NYTimes/NerdWallet calculators implicitly account for that in their logic - they track money you gain/lose from down payment/mortgage/interest/taxes, then selling the house at the end. On the renting side, they only assume investing the money that isn't going to down payment/monthly mortgage payments, not investing the full value of the house. My blog post here is just giving an argument that 2 of their parameter…

i stand corrected!

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#27

Okay, somebody help me out here. Maybe I'm missing something, but the basic equation is that you as tenant are paying the landlords costs plus their profit. How can renting ever be cheaper than buying?

In some housing markets, if you were to buy a home (using a mortgage, with current interest rates) and immediately rent it out at market rate, you’d be losing tons of money. The price-rent ratio varies dramatically from city to city and even between different types of properties.

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#28
post #18

Okay, somebody help me out here. Maybe I'm missing something, but the basic equation is that you as tenant are paying the landlords costs plus their profit. How can renting ever be cheaper than buying?

And mortgage costs are somehow free? :)

No, but the landlord has those too. Or at least, some landlords have them.

So, you have the landlord having mortgage costs, maintenance costs, insurance costs, and still wanting a profit. And you have the homeowner, having mortgage costs, maintenance costs, insurance costs, but getting to keep what would have been the landlord's profit.

So the GP still has a valid point.

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#29
I think the downside of your analysis is you don’t consider the impact of leverage on rate of return. The amount of equity you actually put in is very small so even though the overall return is low, the actual return on investment is much higher than your analysis shows. Or put simply no one would buy stocks with a very small down payment and an enormous amount of leverage the way that they buy real estate and that’s what you’re missing

Re: Buying a Home Is Probably Even Worse Than NYTimes/NerdWallet Calculators Imply

#30

I'd point out that the data for homes is averaged nationally. Historically, there have been Good Places and Bad Places to buy a home. Home price growth in in-demand coastal areas is very different than in rural areas. In the US, "Flyover states" I'm sure skew this number heavily. Part of this is captured by the Volatility Index mentioned > Individual houses are 4x the volatility of a housing index, close to the same…

I'd point out that while an asset, yes, it is a liability. Not in the typical financial sense, either!

I'm hesitant on buying because I have next to no certainty in my role. If I be a good little Business Man and make someone else filthy rich, have all the make-up beers, and show up on time: at-will employment is still a thing. I may still be forced out by circumstance.

Equity might make the hit softer, I don't know. I do know a rainy day fund will be useful.

Post reply on HN