Skip to content
×
PRO
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
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. 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.
General Real Estate Investing
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 10 years ago,

User Stats

65
Posts
39
Votes
David Schach
  • San Francisco, CA
39
Votes |
65
Posts

50% rule seems extremely arbitrary

David Schach
  • San Francisco, CA
Posted

I am very familiar with this rule of thumb, however it seems so misguided and arbitrary and takes into account almost nothing other than a base rental assumption.

Say you've got a 10 unit building and most tenants are drug addicts and are paying below market rents and the property is old and serious repairs are most likely imminent, you are probably looking at 90% of your rent for expenses. Or the reverse could be true, you've got a really nice new 3 unit building with stable well employed tenants all paying at market rents. Your 50% goes down to maybe 20%, maybe even less.

I personally find this rule of thumb so random when trying analyze cash flow on potential rentals. The simple fact that the 50% can move from 100% to 10% depending on a host of variables unique to each particular property makes using this rule kind of pointless in my mind. 

please correct me if i am wrong here.

Loading replies...