@Ari Hadar
I wouldn't look at it as a situation, in which, one is better than the other. It really comes down to which works better for your strategy. From everything I've heard and read about Cleveland, it does really well for cashflow. So, if you're looking to capture that rental income as your main driver of a property, Cleveland may be the way to go. Especially because it seems, on the whole, you can generally find relatively inexpensive properties that cashflow really well.
In Columbus, you're probably not finding as many inexpensive properties like that, which also cashflow really well (unless you're direct marketing). You may be paying more, which is going to decrease cashflow. However, Columbus is one of the fastest growing cities in the Midwest. Our diverse economy is bringing in a lot of people and investors. That's causing the market to increase dramatically, which is good for appreciation obviously. As a example, I own a duplex in a neighborhood in South Columbus called Merion Village, which has seen a ton of investment and growth the last handful of years. In the almost three years I've owned it, the property has appreciated almost 14% per year. Which is crazy. Downside (and it's really not in the grand scheme) has been the increase in property tax each year because the area is improving, which has raised the mortgage, which has decreased cashflow. But, I have an asset that is much more valuable than when I purchased.
So, one isn't necessarily better than the other. Cleveland's strength is great cashflow, probably better than Columbus on the whole. If that's your goal, then put your money there. But, Columbus, while having less cashflow, has higher appreciation potential. It's a longer term game here. Different strokes for different folks!
