Tax strategy changes the math dramatically.

The Math is Tight (The $3.5k Ceiling)This is the hardest pill to swallow.

This sounds overwhelming and has a lot of math involved. 

Jay nailed the wealth-building math on principal paydown and tax benefits.

The math can work.

2 SFH remain. Rents at 1400/1500 mo.4% notes. Balance remaining 50k ea. Value 300/320k. Bought for 70/100k app 20 years ago. Refinanced, 10-12 years ago, cash out, lower rate. Payments are 900/mo mortgages total for ...

No, math is math, it's never wrong.

If I can find properties with built-in equity, then Option B may be possible for me.The idea is not to do a BRRR or pull cash out, but simply to:⁍ Use less cash upfront on deal #1⁍ Preserve capital so I can move faster on deal #2⁍ Refinance later to remove PMI and ARM riskBased on my rough math:⁍ Initial loan at 10% down ≈ $180k⁍ To refi at 80% LTV without bringing cash, ARV would need to be ≈ $225k⁍ Realistically, most near-turnkey deals won’t hit that, so I expect I’d need to bring some cash to refi⁍ Estimated "extra cost" for this strategy (PMI + higher interest for ~6 months) is roughly $1–2kSo my core question is:Does it make sense to intentionally accept a bit of short-term inefficiency (PMI, ARM, refi costs) in exchange for faster portfolio growth and better capital velocity early on?

Oh yeah, we like to gloss over the negative, but I deal in the real world.I think most lending of this sort is in the 2nd position (very risky), if involved in purchases, or is to an overly optimistic "investor" buying a property at full price using a creative finance technique or doesn't anticipate market conditions shifting or . . . on and on.

The best studies involve on-site inspection and photographic documentation rather than just plan reviews and assumptions.