I did however use a well vetted calculator to model my version after so that I could double check what I was doing initially. 

The OP is operating a highly profitable business model, with returns significantly outweighing the risks.The risks originate from (1) purchasing without title insurance, (2) having to perform a quicker less extensive due diligence on subject properties than you would in a "normal" contract situation, and (3) since these aren't cash flowing stabilized properties should the market "shift" radically the buyer won't be able to use "time' to bail them out. 

The financial models those groups use are customized to the philosophies of the group because having a one-size-fits-all model creates too many options.Some groups have lots of fees, waterfall returns, and even different waterfall returns depending on how much a person invests.

I was thinking about this primarily in the context of involving non-accredited investors, which I assume is what most investor club models rely on.

The business model didn’t change.

After that, it is usually a qualitative analysis among few choices.Creating a model like this will cause you to spend far more time "perfecting" the arbitrary model than actually talking with your prospects to get to know them.

So if you're underwriting for 2026 you do need to make a change compared to 2025, but probably not the full 15% since many hosts are still on the split fee model.

This model works extremely well in in slow months like right now. 

I actually am not modeling the growth to offset this.

Additionally, we are texting as our primary deal source, so this reduces the need to have dozens of cold calling VAs on staff, which makes day-to-day management easier.Why This Model Works in 2025The biggest mistake many wholesalers make today is holding onto outdated models—bloated VA teams, reliance on cold calling that has a long conversion cycle, or chasing saturated markets.