I’m surprised no one has chimed in yet. I’m curious to see other responses, analysis & opinions.
I’ll qualify all of this by saying I’m new and just applying what I do know (so feel free to correct me where I’m wrong – I’ll learn something new!).
On a first glance I thought "no", but giving it a closer look and for having no skin in the game I don't think the numbers are too terrible to consider. One thing I didn't see you mention is it looks like the primary loan is amortized over 20 years. This immediately reduces your cashflow by $439.59/mo and makes the numbers look worse than they really are since more of that mortgage is paying down equity than it initially appears.
I wonder if the below-market rent assumption is too conservative? If you’re renting a 1950’s 3/1 that’s 900 SqFt for $825/mo and the market rate for a 2003 3/2 that’s 1200 SqFt is around $850 - $900/mo is $875 a fair number to use?
It does not break even with the 50% rule until rents are right at $875 / mo. Taking the expenses approach at $875 provides an NOI closer to $39k with a DSCR of 1.24. With the same assumptions ($875/mo) and primary amortized over 30 years the DSCR is 1.5 with a cashflow of ~$1077/mo.
Bottom line (which you hinted at): This looks significantly better once you get into a 30-year fixed.
Just a thought; if you own a house free and clear could you do a cash-out refi or a HELOC at a lower rate to get down-payment funds that would also help you get a 30-year fixed up front to reduce your total debt-service?