Christian Osgood pushes back on the idea that stocks beat real estate over five years, using Graham Stephan's California rentals as a case study. Stephan's expenses surged while rental income stagnated, making stocks look better short-term, but Osgood says that's not how you predict long-term returns. Interest rates and market cycles matter more than recent performance.
Chapters
Confident that you'd make more money in the stock market over 5 years than more money in the housing market over 5 years. Okay, when you account for your expenses, property taxes, insurance, repairs, mortgage interest, I think you'll outperform in the stock market. Let's talk 5 years.
Two major problems with this. First of all, the last 5 years does not dictate the next 5 years. We all know interest rates spiked, real estate had a hard time the last 5 years. That is not a reason to assume it's going to do bad in the future. Actually, it's an indicator it's likely to do better. Additionally, who are we actually listening to here? Graham Stephan's talked many times about single-family California portfolio and how he made the decision not to raise prices for his tenants. Now, while that may seem very kind, uh, California's expenses went through the roof. His income stayed flat on single-family in a bad real estate market. Of course his stocks did better. That is not an indicator they'll do better in the long term though. Don't use this as investing advice. You gotta pay attention to what market we're in and who you're listening to.