My 100k house vs 100k in the S&P 500 (16 years later)

[K S.]

A turnkey home for 100k renting for 1k (1% rule) would net you worse than the stock market 16 years later. I went back through my 1099s and calculated my return and estimated closing costs, federal taxes, capital gains tax, depreciation recapture etc for my coming sale. Also, most people won't mention that many homes need to be renovated before the sale which cost me around $25,000.

SFH: 160k cash + 115k appreciation after sales fees and taxes over 16 years = $275,000 total earned after sale.

S&P: 580k -80,000 capital gains tax = $500,000

If you had a mortage, you'd be worse off and scraping by for the next 30 years, Ouch!, that's no fun to realize 30 years later.

S&P 500 almost doubled the returns of the SFH over the last 16 years yet I still argue with people that financing a turnkey property for investment is a terrible idea but since half the advice on here comes from salesmen or book experts, their best interests aren't being made or tailored to each persons individual needs and goals. Hopefully, new investors read this and help them with their decisions.

If you're still not convinced what you would rather do, remember that the S&P 500 took no skills and a few minutes to set up but the SFH was a lot of work over the years, buying, selling, cashing out, fixing, landlording, not to mention RISK like being sued or insurance not paying out for damages/fire/hail.

Being that the S&P 500 is nearly twice as good, you may need to purchase 4 of these properties at 25% down just to match the S&P (subtracted cashflow. 

Unless I'm mistaken and missed something on the leverage part, one can conclude that multi unit land developers or perhaps section 8 hustlers leveraging themselves to the gills is the only way to beat the stock market without just dumb luck and buying houses in the 2012s.