Real Estate vs Stocks… The stock market beats real estate every time, right?

**Wrong.**

Unfortunately, there is a lot of misinformation out there on the web when comparing real estate vs stock market.

**So who’s right?**

There are a lot of respectable people on both sides of the argument, but we need to dig down a little deeper first and sort out the good from the bad information.

To answer the question “stock market vs real estate,” we must first determine what the returns are for both. The average returns of the s&p 500 are well studied – It is widely known that stock market returns are around 10% per year, or around 7% once adjusted for inflation. Look at the chart below:

An initial investment of $100 would have become $2,522.54 by October 2017. During this time you would more than 25x your money with an average yearly return of 7.195% which is in line with the information above (I used this calculator to determine the average return). That’s really not a bad return at all!

This is very tricky but also very simple. The problem is that most people think of home values as “real estate” as a whole. While single-family residential homes are an important part of the real estate market, homes make terrible investments and shouldn’t be looked at when deciding what the real estate market is doing.

The key to real estate investment is its ability to produce cash flow (ie. dividend). Single-family homes do not create cash-flow for investors so they are not investments.

Instead, we should look at what actual investment property returns to its investors, and this is calculated using capitalization rates. The Capitalization Rates is the ratio of income from a property net all operating costs to the price.

Capitalization rates give us a very easy way to compare the stock market to real estate. If you want to beat the stock market, simply look for a property with a 7.2% cap rate or higher and you win. Also, you can have a lower cap rate if you use leverage to exceed that. (low-cost and long-term leverage is one of the advantages of real estate).

But this isn’t the whole story. Cap rates fluctuate over time so we really need to dig deeper. I just wanted to explain the difference between single-family and income-producing real estate.

Unlike the stock market, which has been widely standardized and studied, real estate is extremely difficult to categorize and standardize because of the unique nature of every single property and the privacy surrounding most deals.

First, I’ll compare the sock market returns to a fairly average deal that can be attained in real estate.

Then, I’ll use a proxy to estimate returns across the real estate market as a whole. After a bit of research, I found a composite REIT index that has been tracking real estate in the US since 1972. Exchange-traded REITs make their information publicly available and also trade on the open market – allowing us to estimate returns and track them with accuracy.

REITs are a unique aspect of real estate and I wouldn’t say they are the best (or worst) investments. I’m simply suggesting that if REITs are doing well, real estate as a whole is doing well. If REITs are doing poorly, we can also believe that real estate as a whole is doing poorly. Proxies are not perfect, but they work well enough.

So, let’s dive into an example deal.

The first thing we’ll have to discuss briefly is Capitalization Rates.

In all of real estate, except residential (1-4 unit), Cap Rates are used to calculate overall returns of an asset. Basically, it is the total return of a deal if it was bought in all cash (no debt). Because mortgage payments can vary drastically depending on the individual borrower, this is a standardized way to compare properties.

So, if a property has a 7% capitalization rate, also called a “7 cap” property, it would have a total return of 7%. So, if you bought it for $100,000, you could expect a total return of $7,000 per year. This, of course, does not take into account any potential appreciation.

Here is a much more detailed article about cap rates, if you’d like to take a deep dive.

Let’s take an example deal and say we are buying it at a 7% cap rate. You may not be totally familiar with cap rates and what is high or low, but I’ll just say that even in an amazingly hot market like it is in 2018, deals can be found at a 7% cap rate (just not in downtown big cities like NYC, Boston, etc).

They may be in the suburbs or cities surrounding these core markets, but these deals can definitely be found.

Let’s take a look at a quick rundown of some numbers in my quick and dirty analyzer

You can download this calculator (for free) right here.

Based on the rents and expenses I put in there, at a 7% capitalization rate, this deal is worth around $353k. So I inputted that in as the purchase price and ran the numbers.

The overall cashflow is only $5,712 which is a cash n cash return of 6.47%. If you’re wondering what cash on cash return is, it’s just the cash received vs the cash invested. You can deep dive into cash on cash return here.

But, real estate is more complex than that. You have a mortgage and your tenants are paying that down every month. So, I added the *approximate* equity that is paid down. This is just a quick analysis calculator so it’s just the interest rate * the mortgage amount.

This bumps the return to over 12%.

Also, you can play around with the appreciation and see how just a 1% appreciation adds 4% to the total return due to the power of leverage.

You can click buy or sell and get all the shares you want for just a few bucks. But, real estate has a lot of transaction costs and inefficiencies that can cost anywhere from 5-8% of the total purchase/sale price.

You need to increase the value of your property by 8% just to cover the costs to sell it! That’s crazy to think about. Buy right in the first place because of the extremely high transaction costs.

Having an example deal is great, but who knows if it’s normal or just a fluke. So, let’s compare it to a broader index.

Before diving into REITs, let’s get some base facts out of the way.

REITs will have much higher management and compliance costs than a deal bought and held by yourself. A massive portfolio will have a CEO, regional managers, asset managers, compliance officers, etc. All of this will reduce the returns.

So, if REITs can beat the stock market even a little bit or even just tie, then we know real estate wins.

So, let’s look at the FTSE NAREIT Composite Index.

A $100 investment in 1972 would be worth about $6,839 today. This is a total of 68x your original investment and around a 9.425% return.

Yes, the returns are clearly higher in real estate than in the stock market but the answer isn’t so simple. First, let’s just combine the graphs for fun:

It’s interesting to show that for the first 20-25 years, both indexes closely track each other. They start to diverge around 1996 and they wildly diverge thereafter. Also, it’s interesting to point out the NAREIT index is generally correlated with the S&P 500 (correlation coefficient of .93). These aren’t reasons for or against, just interesting observations.

Real estate, as tracked by the FTSE NAREIT index, clearly outperforms the S&P 500. Buying a REIT fund is the best option, right? Well, most people don’t think of an index fund as “real estate investing” so to be completely fair, we should dive into actual real estate investing and compare it to the S&P 500.

There are literally dozens of ways to invest in real estate in some fashion. The vary from investing in liens to foreclosure, mortgages to equities. It’s impossible to compare everything, so we’ll just look at the top 3 ways people invest in real estate.

We’ve covered this a bit while looking at the NAREIT Composite. Real estate ETF’s and REITs have a low cost to get involved, and they are still priced mostly based on their underlying real estate holdings. There are a few pros and cons to these:

Pros:

- Compared to actually buying real estate, people can buy into an exchange-traded fund or REIT for as much or as little as they want.
- Very liquid – you can sell them very quickly.

Cons:

- REITs and ETFs correlate with the broader market.
- REITs incur significant regulations and overhead expenses to get listed on the stock exchange.

Since REITs and ETF’s are still stocks and are tracked daily, they can be compared to the stock market quite easily. This is exactly what I’ve done by looking at the NAREIT Composite index.

I’m personally not a huge fan of REITs though I do have money invested in one REIT.

Most Americans look at their homes as an investment and I very quickly dismissed this idea at the top of this article. Here’s a deeper look at why.

The average home appreciation is 3.5% while the average US inflation rate has been just over 3%. So, in the best case scenario, your house is earning next to nothing. This is widely studied in economics and is published in what’s called the Case-Shiller Index which shows that over a long period of time (century +) real estate tends to go back toward its long-term average. So, over the very long term, homes don’t appreciate.

Also, you need to set aside 1 to 4 percent of the home value every year for maintenance. If your home appreciates at the same rate as inflation, you are really losing 1-4% per year because of maintenance.

I personally would consider a home like an expensive bank account (which is why I prefer a duplex or triplex instead). Unfortunately, most people will spend more money maintaining your home than it will ever return to you in appreciation which is why it’s not a good measure for real estate investments.

Investing in real estate could mean buying a rental property and leasing it out yourself, investing passively through a syndication, buying tax liens, giving private mortgages, buying commercial, retail, or self-storage, or buying just about anything else that’s related to real estate.

All of these are very interesting ways to invest. It’s hard to break down every sub-niche of real estate and what the potential returns are. In general, the pros and cons are:

“Real property” is real estate and everything else is “personal property.”

It is tangible and cannot disappear suddenly, it never falls out of favor, and nobody can steal it (unless you don’t pay your taxes). You can also pass it down from generation to generation and it will never disappear or deplete (except in some extreme circumstances).

So, when considering the question “stock market vs real estate,” you need to think about how tangible the asset is. Businesses come and go but real estate is there forever. Though they can be difficult to quantify, these are real benefits that only real estate can provide.

This is the biggest advantage of real estate vs the stock market. Real estate can safely and cheaply, be leverage to really bump your returns.

Without diving into particulars, you can take a rent-producing property and leverage it. With the leverage, the return on investment goes up because the amount invested in the deal decreases.

One option is to leverage a stock portfolio as well. Unfortunately, it is generally at much higher interest rates, shorter terms, can be subject to sudden calls, and adds a huge layer of risk.

Real estate has extremely mature lending markets where capital is plentiful and cheap and the terms are often 10-30 years.

Joseph over at My Stock Market Basics makes a great point about liquidity. It goes without saying, but you can’t sell your house on a whim while you can cash out of the S&P 500 tomorrow. This is both a good and bad thing.

It’s good because people are emotional and tend to do the opposite of what’s smart. When the market crashes people want to sell what they have and hoard. Instead, they should buy more at a discount. Real estate is illiquid and doesn’t allow people to make extremely rash decisions.

On the other hand, it is very hard to rebalance a portfolio or cash out completely.

You can click buy or sell and get all the shares you want for just a few bucks. But, real estate has a lot of transaction costs and inefficiencies that can cost anywhere from 5-8% of the total purchase/sale price.

You need to increase the value of your property by 8% just to cover the costs to sell it! That’s crazy to think about. Buy right in the first place because of the extremely high transaction costs.

I can’t give you an exact answer because everyone has a different situation. I can simplify it a little for you:

**Invest in Real Estate**– If you’re looking for higher returns but don’t need the money back immediately. Also, invest if you have time to learn about real estate and plan to hold long-term.**Invest in the Stock Market**– If you don’t have a lot of money to start investing with. Also, invest in it if you need your money to be more liquid.

Though real estate clearly earns more, it may not be the better investment for you, depending on your situation.

**Here’s an alternate perspective one of my readers sent to me**

To compare the net worth impact of real estate vs. stocks, the first thing to do is figure out how much cash you would need to invest in a rental property. In other words, what is your principal? For a rental property investment, your principal will be the sum of:

- Your down payment
- Your closing costs
- Any repair money needed to make the property ready for tenants
- The expenses associated with any initial vacancy before you rent the property (mainly your mortgage payment plus utilities).

Rental Principal = Down Payment + Closing Costs + Make-Ready Repairs + Vacancy Expenses

Let me give you an example using an actual property that I am in the process of buying. It’s a 3 bedroom, 3 bathroom townhouse worth about $300,000. It’s a short sale, and my offer of $270,000 has been accepted by the seller. I’m putting 20% down, which is $54,000. Closing costs will be about $7,000, and I plan to put in roughly $8,000 for make-ready repairs. The repairs will take a couple weeks, setting me back about $1,000 for the initial vacancy. This leaves me with a nice round number of $70,000 for my principal.

One quick clarification: When I say stocks, what I really mean is a passive investment portfolio. I invest in a mix of stocks, bonds, and REITs. I want to compare the net worth impact of that mix to the net worth impact of a rental investment.

Calculating the net worth impact for a passive investment portfolio is relatively easy. The hardest part is figuring out what kind of return you’re going to get. I’ll use an example that assumes a 6% return. Jack Bogle and Warren Buffet have estimated roughly a 6% return in the stock market going forward. If you think the number should be different, it’s very easy to calculate using different numbers.

I calculate my net worth impact at the end of 30 years because that’s when the mortgage will be paid off, and I’ll be nearing the retirement age. The calculation for net worth impact (NWI) is:

NWI for Stocks = Principal × [(1 + Return) ^ Years]

Here, $70,000 is our principal, our return is 0.06, and the number of years is 30. So, if I take my $70,000 and invest it in a passive income portfolio instead of a rental property, I can expect a net worth of roughly $402,000 after 30 years.

NWI of $70,000 stock investment at 6% for 30 years = $402,000

That’s pretty good! Can we do better by investing in real estate?

The net worth impact of a rental property investment in a particular year will be the value of the property in that year plus the cash flow accumulated to that point, minus any mortgage debt still owed.

NWI for Real Estate = Property Value + Accumulated Cash Flow – Mortgage Debt

For our example, we’re using 30 years as the time period, which means the mortgage debt will be zero. The calculation for property value is similar to the one for stocks. The difference is that I use a return of 2% because that is in line with historical inflation.

Property Value = Value at Purchase × [(1 + Return) ^ Years]

For the $300,000 property that I’m looking at, the property value will be roughly $543,000. We’re already doing much better than our stock investment, and we haven’t even considered accumulated cash flow yet! This is the power of leverage.

Calculating your accumulated cash flow is a bit trickier – I use a spreadsheet to help figure this out. The first thing to understand is that your annual cash flow will be your rental income minus your expenses. (read more about calculating cash flow)

I use Zillow and Craigslist to estimate what I can charge in monthly rent and multiply by 12 to get the annual rental income. I then multiply that by 95% to account for a 5% vacancy rate in case I’m unable to rent the property for a few weeks during the year. Over the past year, the Zillow rent estimate for the property I am buying ranges from $1,800 to $2,000 per month, so I’ll stay conservative and estimate rent at $1,850. Below is my expected rental income for the first year:

$1,850 × 12 × 0.05 = $21,090

Calculating expenses is a bit more involved, but I’ll break down everything below. The below list includes typical expenses for a rental property and how those expenses can be estimated:

- Mortgage Payment – You can use a mortgage calculator to figure out your monthly payment, and then multiply that value by 12 to get your annual payment.
- Property Taxes – These can be found on Zillow or on the property listing.
- Landlord insurance – If you’re doing a full analysis, you’ll want to get a quote for landlord insurance, but I have found $350-$500 to be a good estimate for condos, $500-$750 to be a good estimate for townhomes and $750-$1,250 to be a good estimate for single-family homes.
- Maintenance reserve – This covers your maintenance costs for things like plumbers, HVAC inspection/repair, lawn maintenance, and other things that break. A good rule of thumb is to set aside 5% of your rental income for condos, 8% for townhomes, and 10% for 3-4 bedroom single family homes.
- Capital expenditures – This covers replacement costs for big-ticket items, like appliances, HVAC systems, roofing, flooring, etc. A good rule of thumb here is to set aside $120 per month for condos, and $200 per month for 3-4 bedroom single family homes.
- Homeowners Association (HOA) dues – Check the listing for HOA dues. You can sometimes find these on Zillow, but I have found Zillow to be less reliable than the listing.
- Utilities – This only applies if you pay for any utilities, which I don’t recommend. I have my tenants pay for utilities because it’s easier for me.
- Property management fees – I don’t recommend using a property manager unless you have a big portfolio of rentals. Management fees eat into your profit in a big way, and it doesn’t take too much work to manage your property if you find good tenants and conduct routine maintenance inspections. If you do use a property management company, I estimate fees at around 11% of rent, which includes a monthly percentage of rent (typically 7% or so) plus a fee to find and move in new tenants (typically half of one months’ rent).

In my case, the numbers are as follows:

Those expenses add up to $20,798 in the first year. So the cash flow for the first year of this property is as follows:

$21,090 income – $20,798 expenses = $292

To calculate the accumulated cash flow over 30 years, we need to know how much our cash flow will increase every year, which we can do by comparing the first year cash flow to the second year cash flow. To calculate the second year cash flow, I assume inflation of 2% on rent and all expenses other than the mortgage payment, which is fixed. So our rental income becomes $21,512 because $21,090 × 1.02 = $21,512. From the table above, the non-mortgage expenses become $7,818 because $7,665 × 1.02 =$ 7,818. So our second year cash flow is:

$21,512 income – $20,951 expenses = $561

The difference between the first year cash flow and our second year cash flow gives us our cash flow increase, which will also increase at a 2% rate every year:

**$561 – $292 = $269**

Now we have both of the numbers that we need to calculate accumulated cash flow: (1) the first year cash flow, which is $292, and (2) the cash flow increase after the first year, which is $269. Getting from these numbers to accumulated cash flow after 30 years is a bit tricky, so I use a spreadsheet. If there are any math gurus out there that can come up with a simpler calculation, I would love to hear from you! Here is the spreadsheet, which I’ll explain below:

The numbers in green are our inputs, and the yellow number is our accumulated cash flow after 30 years. The base cash flow is our starting point for a year, which is based on the previous year’s annual cash flow. The annual cash flow for a year is the base cash flow for that year plus the cash flow increase for that previous year. In year 1, we use $292 as our base cash flow (calculated above). There is no cash flow increase in the first year, so our annual cash flow for year 1 is $292. We set the base cash flow for year 2 equal to the annual cash flow for year 1 ($292), and add the year 2 cash flow increase of $269 (calculated above) to get an annual cash flow of $561 for year 2. This pattern continues through year 30.

After we know the annual cash flow for each year, it’s easy to calculate the accumulated cash flow for any year. The accumulated cash flow is simply a sum of all of the annual cash flows up to and including the year in question. As you can see, the accumulated cash flow for year 30 of the property I am buying is about $151,000.

As a reminder, we can calculate our net worth impact for real estate as follows:

Property Value + Accumulated Cash Flow – Mortgage Debt

We calculated our property value after 30 years as $543,000, and our accumulated cash flow as $151,000. And since the mortgage will be paid off in 30 years, the mortgage debt is zero. So, for the property that I am buying, the net worth impact is:

**NWI (no reinvestment) = $543,000 + $151,000 = $694,000**

This is $292,000 more than the $402,000 NWI that we calculated for stocks! This is assuming that you do nothing with the accumulated cash flow. The last column of the table above shows what happens if you reinvest your cash flow at the 6% rate that we used for stocks. In this case, your accumulated cash flow grows to $271,000, giving real estate a $412,000 edge over stocks!

**NWI (reinvesting cash flow) = $543,000 + $271,000 = $814,000**

__Assumptions and Considerations__

Here are a few additional considerations:

The two biggest assumptions here are a 6% return on a stock portfolio and a 2% inflation rate. Those numbers are reasonable because they have historical backing. However, you can easily adjust the above calculations to test various returns and inflation rates. By changing these values, you can see the net worth impact for your particular portfolio and your assumptions about the future.

Given that I will be moving my portfolio from riskier investments like stocks to safer investments like bonds as I near retirement, the 6% return may be a bit aggressive. My portfolio returns will decrease (down to maybe 4%) as I near retirement. This makes real estate even more attractive.

Another assumption is that I will have a 5% vacancy rate. Given that I have rented my condo continuously for 2 years without vacancy, the 5% vacancy rate is a conservative estimate. A 2% vacancy rate (1 week per year) adds an additional $25,000 to the net worth impact of my rental property investment.

Finally, you have to figure out if the additional net worth from rental property is worth your time. Investing in a passive income portfolio is as passive of an investment as there is, whereas managing a rental property is passive most of the time, with occasional bursts of active management. One way to figure out if rental property is worth your time is to take the difference in net worth impact and divide it by 30 years. This gives you the average impact to your net worth per year. In my case, that would be:

$412,000 / 30 years = ~$13,750 per year

Divide that value by the number of hours you expect to spend managing the property per year. In a good year, I spend 10-20 hours managing a property. In a bad year (like this one, which is pretty rare), I spend 40-80 hours. If I spend roughly 30 hours per year managing this property, I will be making $460 per hour. Nice!

$13,750 / 30 hours = $410 per hour

This analysis also doesn’t take intangible benefits into account. For example, I love crunching the numbers and analyzing different investment properties, and buying a property is exciting! Also, I plan to use rental properties to teach my kids about running a business. I plan to have at least one rental property per child, so that each of them can learn about managing people, managing a business, and have a nice recurring revenue stream when I’m gone.

Overall, a balanced approach to real estate and stocks is best because it diversifies your risk. But if there are any readers on the fence about whether to invest in rental properties, hopefully, this article shows you the real boost to your net worth that you can gain from investing in rental properties. If you take the time to analyze potential rental investments using net worth impact, you can increase the odds of making a wise investment.

*Readers: What do you see as the pros and cons of investing in real estate vs. stocks? For those thinking about investing in real estate, what is holding you back? For those who have invested in real estate and stocks, have you analyzed your returns? Which is a better investment? *

Eric is an investor that achieved financial independence at the age of 30. He started in 2009 with the purchase of his first triplex and now owns over 470 units. He spends his time with his family, growing his businesses, diversifying his income, and teaching others how to achieve financial independence through real estate. Eric has been seen on Forbes, Trulia, WiseBread, TheStreet, and other financial publications.

I started out as a full-time student, over $60,000 in debt, and didn't even have a full-time job (two part-time jobs). Learn the system I used to create a 6-figure passive income.

**Session expired**

Please log in again. The login page will open in a new window. After logging in you can close it and return to this page.

Nice work! I completely agree with all of your points. Just don’t talk the entire pool of stock market investors into getting into real estate, OK? It’s hard enough for us to hunt around and find good deals without more competition. 😉

Thanks!

True, if I convinced too many people, stocks would plummet and real estate would skyrocket.

I’ll try to tone it down a bit.

Love your writing style Eric, and there’s some great truths in this post.

When it comes to investing though,

any asset classcan outperform given enough "hunting for deals". Be careful when comparing exceptional deals to S&P500 average returns….I live in an area with 2-3% cap rates, and the deals you’re talking about look very exceptional to me.

I think it’s also important to point out that different real estate classes will also have entirely different cap rates, just as different companies around the globe will have entirely different rates of return.

But then I’m complicated a simple and nicely written post! 🙂 All things being equal, I think it’s faulty to say one asset class is going to earn bigger returns (real estate) than another (stocks…aka non-real estate companies). It depends more on your investment than the asset class.

Thanks for the compliment Mr. Tako!

2-3% seems amazingly low. Nationwide metro average is something like 4-5% right now, so you must be in a crazy area.

With my analysis, I did historical cap rates vs historical S&P500 returns. Nothing exceptional about what is average.

Geeze, if I compared some of the deals I’ve found it’d blow the numbers out of the water. Then again, people can find great stocks to buy undervalue and make a fortune as well. That’s why I went with averages.

While I agree with the headline I do think that you are a little biased on stock market bashing.

If you put the same effort into stocks as you suggest with real estate investing AND assuming you have a certain level of competence in both then I would speculate them to be about even.

There are times where one will out perform the other but both are totally viable and profitable

Investing passively in an 7 cap deal will virtually always outperform the stock market, little effort required, thanks to leverage.

Very resourceful insights with the stats that i never had a clue before reading this. Real estate is something that is always had a grace among people be it any city or country.

“the returns are clearly higher in real estate than in the stock market”…really?

You can’t compare the S&P with a leveraged rental property, simply because the S&P is not leveraged. You have to compare it with a rental property paid in full with cash: In this case the S&P would be a much superior investment.

To leverage the index, you can just buy the ETF UPRO (3x) which in the last 9 years has had a 40% annual and with no effort. Can you get that with a rental property with NO effort?

All things being equal, the stock market is a better option in the long run.

I compared a composite REIT index against the S&P 500, so I’m not sure if you read the entire article. It’s a very fair comparison, and the REIT index wins.

There are always going to be one stock or ETF that outperforms the index, just like there are deals that have made thousands of percentage points in return. It’s not a fair comparison at all which is why I didn’t get into the details on a specific deal or stock. I could have picked one single REIT as well, but that’s not a fair comparison which is why I picked an index of REITs.

It would be more realistic if you looked at an index of ETFs and compared them to the S&P 500, I imagine the comparison wouldn’t be so favorable. Also, since your 9 year period begins at the bottom of the recession, we really have no data to see how much it will lose during a recession and how it will compare.

Leverage is one of the several key advantages that real estate has because you can get long-term, low-interest rate financing that simply doesn’t exist in the stock market. Also, if you include the favorable tax benefits, they are even further apart in returns.

There’s really no comparison between the stock market and real estate.

How did you figure that real estate gained more than stocks (S&P 500) since 1972? When I checked the returns for the S&P 500 from 1972 to 2017, I got anywhere from an 84- to 100-fold gain on the original investment, depending on the data. This is in contrast to the 68-fold gain for real estate.

—

OK, now I see how you got the measly 25X-gain on the stock market. This is the gain just for price and does NOT include dividends reinvested. With dividend reinvestment, the return for stocks from December 1972 to October 2017 is more like 96X-gain, which translates into a 10.5% annualized return. So you’ll need to find a cap 10 or better to beat stocks then.

Great comment and great question. I didn’t include it for a simple reason – I’d need to include reinvesting real estate rent as well. You can’t include reinvestment of any returns on one item without including it on all others as well, then the math gets messier.

It’s a lot easier to just exclude that and look at core returns. Then, it’s obvious if you reinvest dividends into whatever has a higher core return, you’ll magnify your overall returns.

So, if real estate has a higher base return, reinvesting the rents would grow it at a much faster rate than reinvesting stock dividends into more stocks. Especially since most of real estate returns are in rent and not in appreciation, reinvesting that rent would have a larger magnification effect than dividends do in stocks.

Both investments would have dropped massively in 2008, so you are basically facing similar risks. You can cherry pick any period to show the outperformance of any asset class, that’s a common trick (I just did it in my first comment).

REITs is basically stock market investing. You can always add some of that to your stock portfolio for diversification purposes (again, with no effort).

The real comparison is between the stock market (including REITs) and owning properties. When you own a property you need to factor in the time and effort required to manage it which is a cost that is never included in the equation. Also, chances are you will make serious mistakes along the way that will cut a big chunk of your long term return. You are not diversifying: You are invested in one or 2 particular assets (of the same class). It’s like investing all your money in one or two companies in the same industry.

Anyway, don’t listen to me: Nobel Prize winner Robert Shiller thinks RE is not the best way to get rich (it doesn’t mean you won’t get rich) and he has much better credentials than you or me.

We can all point to different investors with different perspectives. As an economist myself who’s used Shiller’s research in some of my articles on this site, I really like him and his work. But, for every Shiller there’s a Trump or Kiyosaki who disagrees (both of whom are massively more wealthy than Shiller). Even Warren Buffett said it’s a top investment.

Choosing a real estate investment is no different than researching an individual stock to purchase. Nothing is truly passive. But, it can be as passive or active as you want it to be.

You can easily purchase something and spend less than an hour a month per building overseeing your management team… if you choose to. Or you can be more active.

If you want it to be truly passive, just invest in a syndication and still get 15-18% IRR… plus get the depreciation and other tax benefits.

Still no comparison.