BRRRR Vs Flip - I have read other posts but this is a diff qs

[T Sanch]

Hello everyone I hope you are all staying safe ! :)

I am new to BP although I have watched almost every podcast episode.

My name is Tatiana Sanchez and I am just getting started with real estate investing.

I have done substantial research on the BRRRR strategy and I would LOVE if you experts could help me understand something.

I am brainstorming if I should enter the "Buy and Flip" world or pursue the BRRRR strategy.

I am well aware that the numbers will always vary depending on the deal and many other factors, but as a rule of thumb, or an industry average, if I am correct, one would take roughly about 6-10 years to earn the same amount of money on a BRRRR deal, than on a Flip if we consider the numbers on the same deal?

Based on several scenarios that I've found online, if i could for example earn $30,000 on a Flip, yet on a BRRRR deal on that same property i could earn $350 passive cash flow, it would take me:

30000/350 = 85.7 months or 7.14 years to net 30k in rental income.

I understand that I should also be considering tax advantages by expensing depreciation on the properties, as well as property value increasing and not having to pay so much taxes on a Flip, but just looking at the net income part, does it really take that long or I am missing something here?

I would really appreciate some examples.

My goal is to earn passive income, so I know BRRRR would be the strategy to pursue but once I realized how long it would take to earn the same amount of money that I would in a 3 month flip its making me go back to the drawing board.

Thank you all very much in advance! :)

[Billy Zhao]

It seems biggerpockets podcast investors including Brandon and David are all employing multiple real estate income generation methods. BRRRR is just one of the strategies. They do wholesale, flip, BRRRR, and buy and hold on a larger scale. Then they also generate more income by teaching classes, selling books, youtube, podcast, etc. etc.

So I think trying to figure out which one method is superior is perhaps missing the point. All these methods have pros and cons, and you can spend the rest of your life trying to analyze them and debate on them but still can't come to complete confidence that one is better than the other. 

A few general guidelines that are preached by countless successful people:

1- generally, growing assets is more important than growing income - though without a steady and sufficient income you are risking losing your assets due to credit and market risks. At the end of the day, it's the amount of assets you own that define your wealth, not your monthly income. 

2- diversification is one way to control risks but not able to eliminate them - multiple income stream, multiple strategies, multiple partners, other asset class investment are some of the examples

Am I missing something?