Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 54%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$69 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Take Your Forum Experience
to the Next Level
Create a free account and join over 3 million investors sharing
their journeys and helping each other succeed.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
Already a member?  Login here
Buying & Selling Real Estate
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 almost 9 years ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

21
Posts
1
Votes
Adam Shindler
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Detroit, MI
1
Votes |
21
Posts

Understanding the 2% & 50% Rules

Adam Shindler
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Detroit, MI
Posted

Hello,

I am new user and first time poster with a question regarding the 2% & 50% rule.  I am interested in buy-and-hold investing of small apartment buildings and would like to know if my quick analysis of a particular property is correct.  

Cost: $650,000

Units 5: Rent at $1,250 each

May I conclude that I do not satisfy the 2% rule because one would collect only $6,250 in rent (2% of total is $13,000) and that the 50% rule implies I would have $3,125 in revenue before mortgage payment?

With this logic, the deal is obviously a poor investment for my goal of maximizing monthly cash flow, but I would like to make sure that said logic was not incorrectly applied or overly simplistic.

Thank you.

Loading replies...