Skip to content
×
Try PRO Free Today!
BiggerPockets Pro offers you a comprehensive suite of tools and resources
Market and Deal Finder Tools
Deal Analysis Calculators
Property Management Software
Exclusive discounts to Home Depot, RentRedi, and more
$0
7 days free
$828/yr or $69/mo when billed monthly.
$390/yr or $32.5/mo when billed annually.
7 days free. Cancel anytime.
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
Starting Out
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 over 5 years ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

17
Posts
3
Votes
Matt Stevi
  • Orange County, CA
3
Votes |
17
Posts

Deal Criteria Too Stringent?

Matt Stevi
  • Orange County, CA
Posted

Hey all,

New to the real estate investing world as of a couple of months ago. Quick question about my criteria when analyzing deals.

I like to be SUPER conservative when running the numbers on a deal and so I've taken it so far as to factor in 10% of the rent EACH when accounting for vacancy, repair, CapEx, and property management. So, for example: say rent is $1000, I'd be setting aside $100 each for all 4 of those categories ($400 total, not including the mortgage payment, property taxes, insurance, any utilities, etc.)

Is it possible to find a property that will still cash flow and have a good cash on cash return (like 8%+)? I'm asking because I haven't found one yet using this criteria, so now I'm starting to think I should be a little more lenient with my numbers.

Thanks for your help!

Matt

    Loading replies...