≡ Menu
Image of a snowball made of savings money

I love the analogy of saving and investing as rolling a snowball down a hill. Your portfolio starts off ping pong ball-sized – but you can end up with an avalanche of money.

The Snowball was the perfect title for Warren Buffett’s biography.

That said, sometimes in the midst of your journey to financial freedom you may doubt your snowball is growing. Especially when the markets are going nowhere.

You’re automatically adding money to your accounts each month but your number isn’t growing. You might even feel like your snowball is melting.

Keep at it!

Those regular contributions to your equity funds are buying you ever more productive and money-making assets – regardless of how the market prices them in the short-term.

Sooner or later you’ll be rewarded.

Self-fulfilling prophecy

The point of the snowball analogy is that your savings and investments will gather their own momentum.

You may still be pushing – by adding new money – but most of the extra mass added becomes self-generated.

A snowball gathers ever more snow as its surface area expands while it moves forward.

Your investment pot does this when compound interest moves the dial on your returns. Eventually, when your pot is big enough, just a single year’s returns can equal serious money.

A 10% annual return on £500 – fifty quid – won’t have anyone daydreaming of chucking in their day job.

But a 10% annual return on £500,000 is a cool £50,000 added to the financial freedom fund.

When exactly these numbers start to matter for you – when the importance of internal momentum outweighs new contributions – will depend on your own earnings, savings, and expectations.

But keep saving and investing smartly for long enough and you’ll inevitably get there.

It’s just maths.

Ice ice baby

In a typical year for the markets (as opposed to a rubbish one like 2022) my annual portfolio gains now dwarf anything I’ve ever managed to save over 12 months.

Maybe this sounds like a boast. But it’s just me getting paid for actions I started taking decades ago.

I lived like a graduate student for many years to get my snowball rolling. Lots of people would have seen that as a slog, though personally I never felt very deprived.

So I won’t say I’m lucky. I’m in a position I planned for – and bought and paid for.

(I do though feel fortunate to have been able to make it happen without health mishaps or similar.)

I’d have to earn much more than I ever expect to earn again for additional savings to be the main driver of my wealth from here. My portfolio now does most of the work for me.

It could be you

Perhaps you’ve just begun your own march to financial freedom. Money is tight and the idea of having even £10,000 to compound seems out of reach.

So a portfolio that out-earns your day job feels as faraway as Peter Pan’s Neverland.

I remember that feeling.

Indeed one of the challenges of writing Monevator from the other side of financial freedom is your priorities change as your wealth grows.

To some readers – younger, less flush readers – an article by our contributor Finumus about how best to manage a seven-figure pension pot tax-efficiently might seem fantastical, if not offensive.

But Finumus isn’t likely to write about turning down his central heating to save a few quid. Perhaps he’d do it out of principle – once you have the saving habit it’s hard to kick – but it’s no imperative for him.

And many of our readers are in such a position, or close to it. The challenge has turned to how best to extract the wealth they’ve worked so hard to accumulate.

But many of you still have a long way to go.

Now I happen to think that regularly reading about money management at the wealthier end of the spectrum is still useful and educational.

I’d even dare to say aspirational.

It gives you a vision of where you’re headed. And perhaps what mistakes you might avoid along the way,

But it can also feel a bit like pressing your nose against the window of a restaurant you can’t yet afford.

We’ve tried to find a younger contributor to help with this issue, but nobody has quite worked out for the long haul.

Perhaps they’re all off shouting into an iPhone on TikTok? I have my doubts but who knows.

For now you’re stuck with older duffers trying to recall our roots as young would-be FIRE-ees.

The upside is we’re living proof it can be done. The Accumulator, Finumus, and I all achieved financial freedom in different ways.

It’s not easy, but it’s very doable.

We might disagree about what FIRE means in practice. (I don’t take private helicopters, for example. Finumus’ mileage may vary…)

But for all of us, compound interest is the real deal.

Ignore the haters and just get started.

Money matters

I was prompted to think about all this recently for two reasons.

Firstly, there was Warren Buffett’s latest Berkshire Hathaway meeting – the first without his sidekick Charlie Munger.

Buffett made himself one of the richest men in the world on the back of early frugality, a de facto hedge fund, amazing investment returns – and of course compound interest.

So did Charlie Munger, who was so absent from this year’s meeting. And all the money in the world can’t bring him back.

Memento mori.1

Secondly, and much more prosaically, InvestEngine extended its cashback offer for ISA transfers. (Affiliate link, terms and conditions apply.)

Now, I have ISAs with a few platforms. Why not transfer one to bag £1,000? It’s free money, after all.

A decade or two ago, when I had much smaller pieces to move around the board, I’d definitely have gone through the hassle – and the risks of being out of the market – to bag the cash.

Even today a grand is a grand. That’s still proper money. Far better to have it than not.

And maybe if I was a passive investor I’d still do the transfer for the cash. InvestEngine is a good platform – see our broker table and review – if you’re building out a very cheap-to-run ETF portfolio. So why not?

But for my sins I find I don’t want to chase the bonus at the cost of curbing my naughty active investing adventures. Not even for the guaranteed return of cash back.

The Investor to himself: “You’ve changed!”

FIRE and forget

Buffett’s billions, Charlie’s absence, and the dulling of my own dash for cash instinct got me thinking about some other things I no longer do to bolster my investment pot.

Have I become lazy? Or is this a natural reaction to having a snowball that’s taken on a life of its own?

Some things I used to do to save that I don’t do anymore

Open bank accounts for switching bonuses. Once I’d move money across numerous bank accounts to get sign-up bonuses and time-limited interest rates. Now it’s too much hassle.

‘Stooze’ to arbitrage interest rates. Stoozing is borrowing low interest debt – typically on 0% credit cards – to earn interest elsewhere before paying back the debt without penalty. I was on The Motley Fool boards when user Stooze popularised it, and I did my time in the trenches. For various reasons, no more.

Ruthlessly track and cut my investment fees. I use several platforms – not least because I’m paranoid – and there are slightly cheaper options I could switch to. For mostly non-financial reasons, I don’t.

Avoid all foreign holidays except for special offer weekend breaks. Fortunately I used to go abroad a lot with work, so this didn’t feel like a huge sacrifice. As I got more guilty about flying I dropped the short getaways too. But these days I will go on holiday, at least in theory. (I still hate organising it!) Contrarily, I still think experiences are overrated versus buying stuff you really want or need. But dropping thousands of pounds just to be somewhere else for a week is no longer almost physically impossible for me.

Shun expensive takeaway coffee. In the 1990s I laughed at friends spending coffee at a 10x markup. Yet the first thing I did when the March 2020 lockdown ended was to head to an indie coffee place for a latte to go. Walking through London again with it felt like freedom. And this from someone who loves making my own coffee! Time was I’d have rather fainted in the street then spend larcenous amounts on a flat white. The latte factor won’t make you rich. But at the start it really does all add up.

Shun buying lunch at places like Pret. I used to wince at the cost. If I had to buy food when out and about I’d go to a supermarket and buy cut-priced pastries and a banana or similar. To be honest I still avoid £6 sandwiches if I’m on my own, but I no longer make a fuss if with my girlfriend or others. Part of my annoyance is I’m a decent cook and I’m amazed at what people will happily pay up for. But I don’t begrudge spending on great food. (Or smelly cooking that I don’t want in my flat. Fish and chips, I’m looking at you!)

Buy all my clothes at TK Maxx, in a charity shop, or in the sales. I still enjoy finding discounted fancy stuff at TK Maxx, but I’m not averse to sometimes spending money in a full-price shop these days. Between 18-30 I mostly I wore what I was given for Christmas and miscellaneous bargains, which I wore until they fell apart.

Buy wasting assets at all. Actually, aside from my aquarium habit – which since childhood has stood in for owning cars, smoking 40-a-day, and crack cocaine when it comes to my budget – you had to prise money out of my hands with a crowbar until my 40s. I’m still no huge fan of rampant consumerism, not least because everything you buy tends to bring extra faff in its wake. (Set-up issues, add-ons, upgrades, return hassles). But once you buy your own place, the ultra-frugal gig is mostly done for.

Get a coach to visit my family instead of the train. For a few years after Uni I’d always go to a bus terminal and trundle around the houses for hours to save on long distance journeys. Nowadays I’m a baller who pays through the nose for a seat on a crowded train with somebody’s luggage in my face.

I could go on (and on) but you get the idea.

Snowball’s gonna snowball

I will always like a bargain and I add money to my SIPP each month. But I’m no longer in Defcon 3 savings mode.

True, if I still religiously did all the stuff above then it would mean a decent chunk of extra cash going into my portfolio.

But I guess that given where I’m at financially, it no longer feels it’s worth all the friction and going without.

Does this mean I was foolish to ever sweat the small stuff, as some writers like to suggest?

Emphatically not!

A snowball has to start somewhere and getting started is the hardest thing.

Moreover, the act of cutting back and developing a savings habit is its own reward. One that will pay off big time over a long life.

Those habits are still with me, after all. It’s really just that the sticker prices that have changed.

I’ll happily buy a latte today. But I’m still not driving a show-off car, for example.

Time waits for no one

I don’t care for maths that says frugality can wait until you can earn and save a lot more – even as late as your 50s.

Or that one day you’ll look back and see you could have gone for sushi more often in your 20s.

I don’t believe it works that way.

Sure, you’re 50, earning £X and chucking £Y into your pension.

But I’m already financial free by then, thanks to saving hard, investing, and compound interest.

And as I said, saving and investing is a habit.

Yes, some people get religion late – say 10-20 years away from their State Pension. A few might cut to the bone and still end up comfortably ahead.

But personally I’d bet every day of the week on the person who begins to put real money away by age 25 as the one more likely to end up financially free.

Of course there’s a balance. I didn’t always get it right myself.

Sometimes I was too tight.

It’s also true there are certain experiences that are best had when you’re young. But I’d argue most of these are at the cheaper end of the spectrum, anyway.

Backpacking across Asia staying in youth hostels and scrounging street food with your buddies?

That’s probably worth putting money aside for in your 20s as a one-off experience. It won’t be the same when you’re much older and more easily able to afford it. (Assuming you even have the freedom to go).

But a lavish weekend on a whim in New York, staying at the trendiest hotels, and populating your Instagram account with all your fine dining?

That’s a hard no from me if you’re under-40 and not a Murdoch heir.

Remember, young people are already rich. You don’t need to spend much to play to your strengths.

Ways to start your snowball rolling

Struggling to get going? Here’s a few things we wrote earlier that might help:

Saving is far more important than investing for the first few years of your journey, and if I was whisked back to my late-20s I’d do almost everything the same again.

Even when your snowball isn’t growing much on its own, it’s fun that you can make it noticeably bigger just by chucking more money at it.

As we’ve discussed, eventually your portfolio takes on a life of its own. Then how it grows is more down to the markets than anything you can control. Your financial future is mostly about your investment returns, not your income or savings.

I’ll look at passing this crucial crossover point in a future post. (Subscribe to ensure you see it.)

The not-so-abominable snowball

My best advice would be to enjoy the journey to getting your own snowball going as best you can.

Unless you get a kickstart from an inheritance, a big bonus, or the Bank of Mum and Dad, then the first £10,000 – outside of any pseudo-compulsory workplace pension – is probably the hardest.

Not just in terms of the cash. Also in the mentality shift that says your money is not all there for spending.

The first £100,000 is no walk in the park either. Especially if you’re trying to save a house deposit at the same time.

But after £100,000 you start going places.

A return of 10% is £10,000 extra in a year gathered up by your snowball.

Of course sometimes you’ll do a lot worse, but some years far better too.

Median full-time earnings in the UK are £35,000. So a portfolio that bolts-on £10,000 in a year is a very valuable asset.

With ups and downs, it will only get better from there.

It’s hard to believe it when you start and everything is about cutting and saving, but it’s actually fun watching your portfolio grow.

Stay with this journey, and you’ll find the impulse to spend money on material tat falls away too – even as your ability to splash the cash grows out of all proportion.

That’s not to say you shouldn’t spend any money, especially once you’re on-track or have achieved your goals. None of us is taking anything with us when the clock runs out.

But just having a decent financial buffer at your back – and building the habit of living well whatever The Jones’ are doing – is pleasurable in its own right.

Getting there will probably be one of the biggest achievements of your life. Try to savour the journey!

And start your snowball rolling.

  1. Literally: “Remember you must die.” []
{ 39 comments }

Weekend reading: The risk of ruin

Weekend reading: The risk of ruin post image

What caught my eye this week.

When I finally secured a huge mortgage to buy my London flat in 2018, I confided to a friend that I was excited but also nervous, because for the first time in my life I could go bankrupt.

My friend thought that was crazy talk. He knew I had enough in liquid investments – albeit mostly in ISAs, which I didn’t want to touch – to pay off the mortgage outright if I had to.

Maybe I was just trying to get out of buying the next round?

But I was dead serious and it wasn’t even difficult to imagine a scenario in which I lost everything.

A once-in-a-hundred years recession. Stagflation. Interest rates soar and the housing market collapses. The stock market crumbles – and my active investing does worse. Perhaps I try to trade my way through the unprecedented chaos and blow up completely.

After a few years of this I get ill and find it hard to work.

I’m in negative equity. A 1930s-style crash has toasted my shares. I’m spending the last of my savings to keep the lights on.

One day I update my spreadsheet on a now-ancient laptop and it shows I have a negative net worth.

The sort of thing that has happened to people throughout history.

All too plausible.

For whom the bell tolls

Of course I didn’t judge that my utter ruin was very likely. I’d hardly have bought with a mortgage if I thought  bankruptcy was a 50/50 coin toss. Not even at 95/5 odds.

However I did see it was possible. Indeed I felt this new risk entering the fringes of my sense of self, like icy fingers reaching out from various potential futures. If I strained my imagination, I could almost see the hypothetical disaster lands in the distance – like Frodo and Sam seeing the smoke of Mordor from a sunny green hill, long before they get there.

This visceral reaction was not surprising to me. I’d always hated debt.

I’ve noted before that I’m pretty sure taking out the mortgage tilted my active investing. Particularly in 2018, when I was first getting used to having debt in the picture.

2022 felt much worse than previous bear markets, too. Previously I almost whistled through those.

When Liz Truss drove the ship straight into an iceberg – just as I was coming up to remortgage – I wasn’t whistling anymore.

There’d still be a long way to go, but I knew that any march towards one of my worst-case scenarios would start something like that.

“I wouldn’t risk it”

In my experience most people don’t think this way.

Rather, they see things as pretty binary.

People will take out a mortgage because they have a job and they can meet the payments. This makes the mortgage ‘safe’.

Or they won’t take out a mortgage because they are worried about what would happen if they lost their job, and house prices fell. Mortgages are ‘too risky’.

Of course, savvy Monevator types like us know both things are true, right?

Well yes – but then consider all the debate we have whenever we discuss paying off the mortgage versus investing.

I’ve been called an idiot who shouldn’t dare to blog about money for having a big mortgage while I’m also investing. At the same time I’ve been chided for being wary of leveraged ETFs by none other than Monevator contributor Finumus.

Or you’ll discover that those same people criticising me for preserving my ISAs while running a mortgage also have pensions and a big mortgage themselves. They are just bucketing differently to me.

The thing is, everyone is right!

Risk does increase expected returns.

At the same time risk increases, well, risk.

And not only along a smooth spectrum either, where riskier things are more volatile but if you ignore the noise you’ll be okay.

Also in a very Old Testament sense, where risky things can kill you.

Risk in the moment

Morgan Housel illustrated this brilliantly this week with a series of graphs. I won’t pinch them all (please read his excellent post) but here’s the gist:

The black line represents anything volatile. It could be the stock market, house prices, your income, your health. Perhaps a blend that represents how things are going for you right now.

The red lines are tolerance bands introduced by debt.

How much can you take?

It’s a notional concept – obviously if the stock market soared, say, that wouldn’t directly hurt someone just because they had a mortgage – so don’t take it literally.

Rather it shows how debt is narrowing your window of resilience.

Particularly if you have a lot of debt:

This is a great illustration for how I think about the interaction of debt and risk.

Go and read Morgan’s post for the full picture.

What doesn’t kill you can still kill you

Even a lot of debt and tough times won’t kill you if things go your way.

And milder brushes with danger are soon forgotten.

It’s 2024 and Liz Truss is now just a writer of comic novels. (Or biographies or political treaties, I’m not sure which). As things turned out I was able to remortgage for 4.49%, not 8-9%. And my portfolio has healed.

But there are worlds where those things didn’t happen. They got worse than merely wobbly for me.

Meanwhile, my friend from the 2018 chat is now more nervous about money than he was back then.

What has always seemed to me a gung-ho attitude serves him well in business. He’s a far better entrepreneur than I could ever be.

But yoyo-ing towards the fringes of an eight-figure net worth and back as private markets boomed and bust over the past few years has taken its toll.

Interestingly, he paid off his mortgage a few years ago, when times were especially rosy for him.

Perhaps he was thinking about more than just my next round when we had that conversation, after all?

Have a great weekend.

[continue reading…]

{ 57 comments }

Correcting market failure [Members]

Logo for Moguls member posts

The UK stock market has been on the ropes for ages. Clambering to its feet as the referee counts “six! seven!”

…only to get sucker-punched by the next political own goal, pandemic, or inflation scare.

This article can be read by selected Monevator members. Please see our membership plans and consider joining! Already a member? Sign in here.
{ 35 comments }

The decline and fall of a buy-to-let empire

A row of British terraced houses in ruins

Apparently articles about the fag-end of my buy-to-let (BTL) portfolio are very popular. I don’t really understand why. Voyeurism, maybe?

Well, if writing them puts even one potential landlord off from getting into BTL then I’m doing them a service.

If you’re new, you might enjoy my first article in this series, about my formative days as a landlord in the 1990s. Or try the second about my one remaining property in London.

The only other buy-to-let I have left – hopefully, the third is currently sold subject to contract – is a Victorian terrace in a pointless London commuter dormitory town.

It’s a two-up / two-down with a small garden, and, enticingly for this particular street, it has an upstairs’ bathroom.

Finumus’ folly

I bought this house in 2001, for about £60,000. The first tenant paid me about £450 per month rent. So did the second, who moved in during 2004.

That gave me a gross starting yield of about:

  • £450*12 = £5,400 = 9%

I took out an 85% mortgage at around 6%, set to track 75bps over the bank base rate for 25 years.

My managing agent also charged me about 10%, leaving me with £4,860 net income annually.

That was set against my annual cost mortgage costs of…

  • £60,000*0.85*6% = £3,060

… so after the mortgage I was left with…

  • £4,860 – £3,060 = £1,800

…of cash leftover every year to go towards maintenance and repairs and so on, before I’d hit my cashflow breakeven point.

That was was all I needed really, since inflation would increase the rent and capital value over time.

And that’s where the profit comes from – in theory.

Rent reduction

The tenant from 2004 is still there. Which is why – spoiler alert – I’ve not sold the place.

Her initially fixed-term tenancy turned into a ‘periodic rolling tenancy’ after six months. And the rent, apart from one change in 2008, stayed the same until 2019. 

That one change in 2008 was a reduction. The tenant lost her job and couldn’t afford the rent on benefits, so I lowered the rent.

Not by much mind, to £420 pm. It stayed there until 2019.

So no rent increase for 15 years. 

Now on one level you might think that failing to raise the rent for 15 years is a bit of a landlording ‘skills issue’. 

I’m aware that some landlords increase the rent by the maximum they think they can get away with every year. I am not one of those landlords, or at least I’m conditionally not one of those landlords.

The conditions are:

  1. I’m not making a cashflow loss
  2. You pay your rent on time

My tenant has paid the rent, on time, in full, every month for 20 years. I’m not going to do anything to upset such a tenant, while I can afford to.

I’ve experienced enough of the opposite variety – the tenant that pays no rent at all – thank you very much. 

Near-zero gravity

Even though I was completely negligent in raising the rent for a decade and a half, it didn’t really matter from a cashflow perspective. Because in 2008, the Bank of England cut its base rate to near-zero. And it pretty much left it there until the post-Covid inflation wave.

With a base+75 bps tracker, I was paying only £600-700 per annum on the mortgage for more than a decade.

Yes, like £50 a month.

There was really no need to raise the rent from £420 per month when the mortgage was only costing me £50 a month, was there?

Well…

Costs and consequences

You might think generating some £300 p.m. of cashflow would make this property a compelling investment.

Not so much.

Old housing stock requires a lot of maintenance. There was always something, such as:

  • Garden fence blown down in storm (about once a year)
  • Garden shed collapses due to rot from the neighbours dumping plant material behind it
  • Replace all windows with UPVC double glazing (because she can’t afford to heat the place in winter)
  • Get a new front door because the old one is not secure
  • Get a new boiler because the old one died
  • Replace the electricity consumer unit because it’s not compliant
  • Replace the downstairs flooring because a flood caused by a plumping leak 
  • Eventually replace washing machines, fridges, and so on

Also – you hear that dripping noise?

It’s surely only the sound of money steadily leaving my bank account, isn’t it?

Ahem.

The mould problem

This property has a small, downstairs ‘lean-to’ utility room and toilet out the back of the kitchen – along with the proper bathroom upstairs.

And the downstairs loo often suffered from mould on the walls.

I would find this out from my agent’s periodic inspection report, not because the tenant complained about it.  I’d then immediately instruct the agent to send someone around to sort it out. I’m not the sort of landlord who wants to be letting sub-standard mouldy accommodation. This is far from my vibe.

Whomever the agent instructed would do something – I’m not sure what, but it cost me a couple of hundred quid anyway – to ‘sort it out’. 

But inevitably on the next inspection report the mould would be back. And we’d go through the same cycle again. 

This is all pretty normal. To be expected. Not a problem.

However the costs increased steadily over time – as you might expect, I guess – from £1-2,000 per annum at the start to a £3,000 run rate now.

Some years it’s a bit more. Some a bit less.

Economies of scale

Compounding this problem, the original letting agent – where I had known the principal – got sold to a larger group. Then that group got sold to an even larger group.

In theory this should have brought economies of scale. But in practice, you can probably guess what happened.

Service quality declined and my costs went up.

Although the core management fee remained the same, lots of other costs started appearing. Periodic inspections that used to be included in the management fee got an explicit charge. And the costs of their ‘independent’ contractors went up by a lot. 

Section 24

Since we’re going chronologically, the government also introduced the Section 24 taxation treatment of interest expenses in 2017, staged over four years.

This made mortgage interest not fully tax-deductible. Essentially it meant that one now got taxed on turnover, not profit.

Since we didn’t really make a profit on this property anyway, we had to start paying a bit of tax on profits that we’d not made.

But with interest rates still very low, this didn’t – yet – make too much difference. 

Banning tenant fees

The straw that finally broke the ‘not increasing the rent’ back was the banning of tenant fees in 2019.

These fees include things like reservation fees, credit reference fees, right-to-rent checks, and inventory fees. The sort of thing that, historically, landlords and agents had tried to stick on tenants at the beginning of a tenancy.

Now you might think these fees would be neither my nor my tenant’s problem, on account of the tenant having been there for 15 years?

I would agree with you. My agent though, not so much.

It decided to replace this revenue by applying a fixed surcharge on every tenancy of £15 per month (+ VAT).

This might not be a big deal if you’re letting somewhere for £2,000 a month. But with our £420 per month, that’s 4.2% of the rent.

I wasn’t happy about this. I even ended up having a chat with the CEO of the new-new merged agent about it. His point was, not completely unreasonably, that I was charging a massively below market rent anyway. There was no reason why I couldn’t just put it up by 5%. 

With Section 24 also biting, I was set to lose about £500 to £1,000 a year on this property.

This is not much for a temporary bump in the cost of doing business, maybe. But the other problem was that house prices had stopped going up. In the absence of capital growth, I need the property to at least wash its face.

The other option, of course, is just evicting the tenant and selling it.

But was I really going to evict a single mother, with two kids in school – a reliable tenant, who has paid their rent on time every month for decades?

Honestly, I’d rather not. 

Such are the unintended consequences of government policies to ‘crack down’ on greedy landlords.  

Raising the rent

And so for the first time in 15 years, and with an immense amount of reluctance, I put the rent up.

Only by 5% mind. The agent feels you can’t really just double the rent to the market rent. You need to do it slowly.

The wisdom of just putting the rent up a little bit every year was starting to make a lot more sense now. In anticipation of interest rates rising at some point – and having crossed the Rubicon – I resolved to increase the rent by 5% a year until we got up to the market level. (The tenant was now in employment). 

Since I’d just put her rent up, I decided to make a concerted effort to sort out the mould problem. And as I was between jobs, I took the time to go over there myself to take a look at it.

I unblocked the drain just outside the toilet in question. I removed a five-foot tree that was growing in the silted-up gutter pipe. Next I did a bit of repointing around the affected area. Then I replaced the tiles on the lean-to roof above. Lastly, on the internal wall, I stripped back all of the paint, all of the blown plaster, and re-plastered and repainted with the most toxic and reassuringly expensive anti-mould paint I could find.

It all took about a week of solid work. But I was quite pleased with the result, optimistic I’d sorted the issue out – at least for a while. 

Of course on the next inspection the mould was back. 

Show me the money

Finally, the post-Covid inflation arrives and I’m putting the rent up by 5% every year. Which for a while is actually a real-terms rent cut.1

But this is fine, just so long as interest rates don’t go up…

…which of course they duly do:

From 2022 then, this investment has been making me a loss – even after I increased the rent.

And while Section 24 hasn’t helped, I would have been in the red anyway, on account of my costs and interest rates climbing:

Thankfully property is not my pension.

Shrug emoji

The zero net cashflow, the tax implications, the capital value of the house itself even, are not particularly large numbers in the overall balance sheet of the Finumus household.

It’s not causing me any great financial distress anyway. Which is fortunate for my tenant, I guess.

It does leave me feeling that providing free housing is not an optimal use of my capital. But here we are.

If things stay this way – they can’t, for reasons I’ll get to below – it would take about another five years of compounding 5% rent increases to get back to this house not losing money. (For what it’s worth, without S24 it would only be two years).

But there are a couple of other worries on the horizon.

The first is that my mortgage comes to the end of its term the year after next. Something will need to be done, likely something fairly binary. Either just paying it off or leveraging it up to the max loan-to-value.

I’m not sure which I should do. At some point I might need capital to fill ISAs. Leveraging up is a way of ensuring I have the capital to hand without evicting the tenant. 

Secondly, there are quite a few policy risks floating about that could make things even worse.

Incoming!

The (hopefully) incoming Labour government will doubtless continue the trend set by the Tories of implementing economically-illiterate anti-landlord – and therefore anti-tenant – policies such as: 

  • Rent controls: in which case I’ll need to raise the rent to market levels immediately. 
  • Reduced repossession rights: in which case I’d likely have to evict the tenant and sell it.
  • Possibly something on Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) or similar. 
  • Slightly orthogonally: Labour could re-introduce the Pension Lifetime Allowance (LTA). This would cause me to reduce my pension contributions and raise my marginal tax rate, worsening my Section 24 problem. Though it would also see me retire earlier – which might fix my S24 problem.

None of which will help my tenant, mind you. But people respond to incentives, regardless of how much politicians like to pretend otherwise. 

Cashing up

I’ve only made a few grand from annual cashflow on this investment so far – and even that will soon be wiped out.

But how much capital gain have I made?

Zoopla reckons the house is now worth £210,000. But it has not seen the mould. Let’s conservatively assume the house is worth £180,000 after selling costs.

This would imply I’ve made 200% in 24 years. A pretty underwhelming CAGR of 4.9%.

However £60,000 in 2001 is £109,000 in today’s money. Hence in real terms – that is, after-inflation – the CAGR is only 2.2%.

Oh, we forgot the tax!

If I sold it I’d have to pay 24% capital gains tax.

  • That’s £120,000 * 24% = £28,800 tax

So I’d enjoy a post-tax gain of:

  • £120,000 – £28,800 = £91,200

(Sadly we have to pay CGT on nominal gains, not real terms ones.)

This all works out at a post-tax, real-terms CAGR of…drum roll… 1.43%.

Now you see why everyone thinks BTL is such a money spinner.

As an aside, these sums also suggests that – based on the Zoopla valuation estimate – the current gross yield is only:

  • £6,432 / £210,000 = 3.06%

This at a time when 30-year gilts boast a 4.9% yield-to-maturity.

“MSCI are on the line about the mould again!”

Okay, you could argue that because I used leverage – and the tenant paid my mortgage interest for me – the actual capital invested is the deposit, not the purchase price.

The deposit was:

  • 15% * £60,000 = £9,000

In reality there are a few more costs at procurement time – legal fees, new kitchen and so on. Let’s call those £6,000.

So £15,000 capital all-in.

This certainly makes the CAGR look much better. £15,000 in 2001 is £27,000 in today’s money. My £91,200 gain from £27,000 is a 6.7% real terms post-tax gain.

Not bad at all. But not great either, I’d argue.

Even with leverage we’re hardly knocking the covers off compared to the MSCI World index in GBP terms. And the MSCI World never calls to complain about the mould.

Certainly if I had the choice again in 2001 to do this or fill the ISAs (or was it still PEPs then?) it’s not obvious that BTL would have been the trade. Especially given the hassle. And this during a time when house prices were booming, apparently.

What’s more I’m not even sure whether working on the basis of the deposit is an entirely fair comparison.

Leverage increases risks, and I could have ended up underwater. Not something that would have happened in my ISA. [Well… – Editor, with a wry smile. But no, not underwater…] 

Going forward, it’s hard to imagine house prices are going to rise in the next quarter of a century like they did in the last.

So when people ask me what I think about BTL – which weirdly, they do quite a lot – I just tell them not to bother.

Unless perhaps you have a thing for mould.

Follow Finumus on Twitter and read his other articles for Monevator.

  1. That is, after-inflation. []
{ 78 comments }