Looks like most of the reviews or case studies on Roofstock are about the closing process. I suppose since the vast majority of investors who’ve purchased properties from Roofstock use the properties as buy-and-hold rentals and Roofstock is a start-up that hasn’t been around for long, not a whole lot of investors have sold those properties. I got burnt on my way out when I tried to sell one acquired through Roofstock, which I’ve only kept for ~1.5 years. I wasted a lot of time and lost over 30K from this property. The only thing I gained is increased cancer risks from all that stress.
The short version of what happened:
A local flipper I befriended pointed out a serious undisclosed permitting issue he discovered from public record, which compelled me to sell the property at a discounted price to a local wholesaler instead of keeping it as a rental or selling on the MLS. The Roofstock inspection report made no mention of this issue. I have strong reasons to believe the seller chose not to disclose intentionally.
Due to the way the Roofstock purchase and sale agreement was drafted and certain provisions in Roofstock's Terms&Conditions that investors have to agree to but few actually read before using their website, the seller and Roofstock are well protected from liabilities, much better than a seller and brokers would in a typical MLS transaction scenario. As a result, I have very limited ways or no way of recourse.
Combined with some other things that have happened and my interactions with Roofstock, I feel that buying properties from Roofstock is like buying properties without a buyer’s agent, their “one stop for all” business model is inherently flawed, and the water is too deep for newbie buyers. The increased efficiency is achieved at the cost of buyers' best interests.
Furthermore, despite Roofstock’s effort to find top providers to work with their investors, it looks like Roofstock struggles to bring all of them up to standards and keep them in check. The quality of service from different providers (title companies, PMs, inspectors) swing so widely that the good ones exceed my expectations, and the bad ones make me wonder how they stay in business or why hasn’t got taken out by the FTC. I’ve dealt with just as many bad ones as the good ones. In some cases, buyers have the options to pick the ones they prefer; in other cases just a hit or miss.
Last but not least, Roofstock advisors' excellent work ethics can’t compensate for their lack of knowledge of the local markets. On the other hand, lots of the sellers are institutional investors or local RE professionals, which inevitably shifts even more risks to newbie buyers.
This is a 1-star review for newbie buyers; 3-star review for seasoned buyers who know what to watch out for when evaluating deals; 5-star review for sellers, especially those who want to evade scrutinization from shrewd local brokers and failure-to-disclose-property-defects lawsuits.
Well, since I rate Roofstock 5 stars for sellers, why don't I just list it for sale on Roofstock? The simple answer is that the actual market rent ($900-965/mo) to list price ratio (ARV 120 -140K) would not be enticing to SFR buyers. The market rent Roofstock gave ($1025/mo) when I made the purchase was inflated btw.
I can post a long version to elaborate on the above-mentioned points if more than 10 people on BP are interested to know more.