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
Foreclosures
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 14 years ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

80
Posts
19
Votes
Jordan L.
  • Investor
  • Newbury Park, CA
19
Votes |
80
Posts

Of these 2 REOs, which would you pick?

Jordan L.
  • Investor
  • Newbury Park, CA
Posted

I've got two homes I'm eyeing. Both built in 2005. Location the same. One's 1900 sq ft home selling for 190k. Will definitely rent out for $1500 a month. Another is 2950 sq ft home selling for 220k. Will definitely rent out for $1700k but if you're willing to wait a month, you might get up to $1900.

While I know neither of the 2 fit the 2-50 rule, and not even close, if you had to, which one would you do?

Most Popular Reply

User Stats

17,995
Posts
17,198
Votes
J Scott
  • Investor
  • Sarasota, FL
17,198
Votes |
17,995
Posts
J Scott
  • Investor
  • Sarasota, FL
ModeratorReplied
Originally posted by Jordan L.:
I'm also not 100% sure that stocks will go up, but that lack of certainty doesn't keep me out of stocks.

There's a huge difference between stocks and real estate, and if you haven't considered that, perhaps you should slow down and think about it for jumping head-first into either market...

Stocks will never cost you more than your original equity investment (as long as you don't short), whereas real estate can cost you much more than the purchase price of the asset.

Maintaining stocks requires no support on your part, whereas real estate will require at least some time and effort. If you believe your time and effort has value, then the cost of real estate goes up the longer you hold it.

It's much, much easier to diversify in the stock market than it is to diversify physical real estate holdings; additionally, it's difficult to hedge a physical real estate investment with other real estate investments, though hedging securities with other securities is fairly straightforward.

Stocks are much more liquid than real estate. If you ever find you need the cash for any reason, you can liquidate securities much more quickly and easily than you can liquidate real estate. Additionally, the cost to liquidate securities is minuscule compared to the transaction costs associated with liquidating real estate.

Look, we've given you all the advice we have to give. You're a big boy, and as long as you're comfortable with your investment decisions, that's all that matters. Nothing we say is going to change anything, and in a few years, either you'll be making lots of money/equity or you'll be regretting your investments...as long as you're willing to live with either of those outcomes, you certainly don't need to be defending yourself to us...

Loading replies...