Real Estate Deal Analysis & Advice
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4c55d/4c55d80d9e9c56307c0657551942956d7cdebf54" alt=""
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1bc6e/1bc6eaa078f2be59507d8082e9e6c9db9582a7ec" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/43dee/43dee2bdc33dadf362a5d80e12b9887af577574f" alt=""
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback
Updated over 7 years ago on . Most recent reply
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2e1a7/2e1a786a4b241f55e6e9e1e70fcb93477ea7b3d4" alt="Robert Siverd's profile image"
Actual numbers vs. 50% rule
I would like to get members' opinions on this topic. I have read many articles and forum posts about the 50% rule, but always find a large discrepancy between the rule and the actual numbers. I am aware of accounting for property management - 10%, P&I, taxes, insurance, maintenance - 5%, vacancy - 10%, HOA costs, utilities, and CAPEX - 5%. When I do the math on specific properties I find that the actual numbers never add up to near what the 50% rule would suggest for expenses. I frequently read from experienced investors that over the long term they eventually find that expenses end up being 50% after all. So what makes up for the difference that is not being accounted for on the front end in actual numbers?