Should I consider owner-occupied duplex with little cashflow?

Question

A newbie's dilemma: I am looking for an owner-occupied duplex, but the ones in the area that’s suitable for us to live are just not producing enough cashflows (the mortgage is a lot higher etc). The # on cheaper ones make so much more sense, but I don’t want to live in those areas. I feel that I am over-paying for owner-occupied duplex for the investment purpose, yes I can live on one side and have part of my living cost paid by the tenant, but what happens after I move out?

I did deal analysis at BP, only less than $100 positive cashflow, cap rate 5.3%, the rent definitely doesn’t meet the 2% rule, actually only 0.95%. I can get the same rent with a duplex that’s almost 50~60k less, but the area is not as decent. Should I make compromise due to owner-occupancy?

Jon Behlke · Answer

I definitely agree that the cashflow should be the overriding factor, I was more or less giving you an out if after breaking down all other factors you were still unsure.  Every city has areas that are growing, areas that are stagnant/consistent, and areas that are declining.

While I would never speculate on future appreciation as far as putting a number on it, I would certainly prefer to buy in an area that is on the rise over an area in decline.  This isn't so much in regards to value appreciation as it is on the ability to see an increase in rental rates.

Jacob Sampson · Answer

The 2% rule is a guide, like all other rules.

I think you should do the math, as you have, on both sides being rented at market value because you may not want to live there forever.

I wouldn't personally purchase without cash flow.

Not all areas allow for cash flow purchases so you may need to find another way to invest in real estate in your area.

For analysis purposes, I do monthly rent - 30% (vacancy/maint) - PITI (I prefer 15 year notes) = reasonable expectation of long term cash flow.  I also want that cash flow to be at least 12% CoC ROI if I were to put 20% down + closing costs.

Jon Behlke · Answer

You're the only person that can answer that question, as you are the only one that knows how you prioritize your values.

For example:  Do you have school aged children?  If so, then school district is a big concern and you may opt for the higher priced option.

If you're a single person, or young couple, are you just being an area snob who is not willing to make short term sacrifices for long term gains?

That doesn't even address the issue of market appreciation of the properties in question, or the expected turnover rates for each, or a host of other issues.

You'll have to do an analytical review of the pros and cons based on your values in addition to the items which you can actually quantify, and then base your decision on that.

Good Luck!

Andrew Syrios · Answer

I would forget about the 2% rule first of all, it's not a very good tool. I'm assuming the deal analysis you did was if you rented both sides. It looks pretty tight to me. If it's somewhere you really want to live, that's one thing. But I think you want to look for a motivated seller or something like that where you can get a better deal.

Jessie Niu · Answer

That's true!!

Jessie Niu · Answer

Thanks Jacob, if I use your formular, the cashflow is about $350.

Jessie Niu · Answer

Thanks Jon. Good points!

I wish I were single which would give me much more flexibility, I have a toddler but school district is not an issue at this point. I think for me at this point, is more for feeling secured that we live in an decent area with a kid, not the most desirable area, but decent enough and also close to work. Based on the history of the purchasing price, there's not much of appreciation on the property. :( I also read that we shouldn't speculate the appreciation but should focus on cashflow instead?

Jessie Niu · Answer

Thanks Andrew!

Yes the deal analysis was for both sides rented out.

Should I consider owner-occupied duplex with little cashflow?

Most Popular Reply