Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 16%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$39 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
House Hacking
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated 7 days ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

1
Posts
0
Votes
Trevor Brouelette
  • Property Manager
  • San Diego
0
Votes |
1
Posts

House Hacking brings worse cash flow ?!?!?!?!?

Trevor Brouelette
  • Property Manager
  • San Diego
Posted

I’ve been underwriting deals this month with a goal to analyze 5 properties using an Excel model I built. I recently ran the numbers on a 4-unit property using two strategies:

  1. Traditional buy and hold

  2. House hacking (living in one unit)

What I found surprised me:

The cash flow was actually worse when house hacking!!!

At first, this seemed backward, but it made sense after I thought it through. When house hacking, you’re giving up one unit’s rent, which drops the property’s gross income and overall cash flow. But on a personal level, you’re saving a ton by living for free or at a reduced cost — it’s basically trading property cash flow for personal cash flow.

Now I’m considering bringing in a private lender for my first deal, and it raised a question: 

1. Wouldn’t house hacking reduce returns for a passive investor or lender?
2. Since the rent from one unit is gone, the investor doesn’t get compensated for my personal living benefit. The deal is better for the person living in the property, but not necessarily for the investor.

Curious how others have handled this. Have you structured a house hack with private lenders involved? How do you fairly compensate the investor when house hacking lowers rental income?

Most Popular Reply

User Stats

2,043
Posts
1,492
Votes
Rick Albert#1 House Hacking Contributor
  • Real Estate Agent
  • Los Angeles, CA
1,492
Votes |
2,043
Posts
Rick Albert#1 House Hacking Contributor
  • Real Estate Agent
  • Los Angeles, CA
Replied

Of course cash flow is worse, you are putting less money down. If the numbers work with 3.5% down, an investor putting 20%-30% would jump on it and likely pay more.

In real estate, you make money 4 different ways:

1. Cash Flow

2. Appreciation

3. Tax Benefits

4. Loan Buy Down

So you may not be getting cash flow, but you are still getting the other three. And as already mentioned, it is better than renting. 

Private Lenders are going to be more expensive than conventional loans.

What I've done with my two LA house hacks is leveraged the equity. Used a HELOC to buy the second and then used another HELOC and 1031 exchange to buy out of state.

Because you are in a high cost of living area, your appreciation dollar is higher. 3% appreciation on a $1M asset is $30K. If you used the FHA loan you got almost all your money back in the first year. That's an amazing cash on cash return on equity.

From a rental standpoint, a 3% appreciation on $3K a month is better than 3% appreciation on a $1K a month rental out of state.

House Hacking is more about lowering your overall expenses and playing the long game.

Loading replies...