Every time this question comes up, it’s the same answer. Some people prefer cash flow and some people prefer appreciation. That’s so far from the truth. It’s a matter of misinformation.
No one talks about Debt To Income Ratio or Debt Service Coverage Ratio. It's simple but glossed over if ever mentioned. If your assets DSCR or DTI do not meet your financial lenders requirement, you're dead in the water. It's not a choice, it's a requirement. All I hear is don't take no for an answer. Has anyone actually stopped to ask why lenders say no and then try to play by their rules?
My banks want a 1.25 global DSCR. That's not per deal, that's global. That's my net operating income plus a maximum of 30k from my W-2 divided by my debt service. They look at the deal AND global. Most of mine are single family and on a 15 year amortization. I own too many units for my W-2 to cover the debt, but not enough to cover that .25 on a large property if it's negative or neutral. The best option is cash flow otherwise it's a no from my lenders until I'm showing a strong enough positive income on my taxes. Why wait a year when there is an faster route?
The real question is high rate of growth or high rate of appreciation? We're not buying one asset and staring at it for 10 years. While that next, hopefully, high appreciating asset makes you unbankable for two years, I'm buying more properties. Which will increase wealth faster? 1:1 sure appreciation wins but it doesn't work like that. It's never 1:1. It should be a balance of both. Cash flow covers the higher risk higher appreciating assets to always stay above 1.25 DSCR.
On the other hand, if I had just one option in the magical real estate world, I would take the huge appreciation in 5 years on every property. In reality I’m just trying to keep this lumbering giant moving forward and trying to keep it from crushing me.