Agreed, and in many cases, insurance is destroying cash flow if not pushing it into negative territory. 

Granted it is unlikely to result in a home run, but it also is less likely to fail big and negatively affect prospects for years. 

If I take out $200k, that property  will have a negative cash flow of $500, but the overall portfolio will still cash flow positive and I’ll have capital for another purchase.

The negative equity position is one reason (there are many reasons) why adding an ADU is one of the worse RE investments.  

Doing a LTR would likely be a negative cash flow. 

.* compensating for their small manhood (women carry too)* Afraid/scared* a “little man” (again, women carry too)* have a superiority complex* some other negative thingThe same things are said about people who drive big trucks.

We are in the DC area and I have never heard negative comments about them. 

Why is the 50% rule so negative while the cash flow is positive?

Also, focus on 2 years of job/income stability.Class D Properties:Cashflow vs Appreciation: Typically, all cashflow with little, maybe even negative, relative rent & value appreciationVacancy Est: 20%+ should be used to cover nonpayment, evictions & damages.Tenant Pool: majority will have FICO scores under 560 (almost 30% probability of default), little to no good tradelines, lots of collections & chargeoffs, recent evictions.

Would this large amount not negate any potential savings you would have over the course of the next few years?