Hey Annie - you're asking the right question here.With the assumption you can comfortably afford both houses without the rental income AND they are in equivalent neighborhoods, the house hack will be better from a pure financial perspective for the following reasons:1.

House hacking is the most efficient way to get started… it costs the least amount of money - usually 3.5% - to move in, versus closer to 20% for a pure (not owner occupied) investment property.  

They operate purely with the intent to assign their interest in the contract to another buyer AND do not disclose that to the seller. 

IMO smoke alarm & carbon monoxide battery changes were a great opportunity.

Pure cash flow after a mortgage payment at 25% down, is going to be in the 150-250 unit range. 

I have 25% down.I’m having trouble locking in a conventional lender.This is purely an investment property.

Perhaps I am looking at this purely from a selfish stand point.

Hey Bethany, I live in California and it's a similar situation here... doesn't make sense to invest unless you're purely shooting for appreciation.I invest in Detroit and have 12-doors theres.

Once the new tenant is in, we will be getting $115/door of pure cash flow.

I still spent several hours putting in light bulbs, batteries in the smoke alarms and CO detectors, touching up walls, etc.My lease does not go into specific detail.