[dangus]

Sincere question: why is this better than going with the vast array of mutual funds and ETFs available? Is it the return rate? Something else?

It seems like your typical ETF or mutual fund is easier to get into and get out of, just a few clicks on your brokerage of choice.

Your answer brought up the obvious general answer: the only way to make passive income from investments is to already have a lot of money. To me there's a point where the method of investment almost seems like an irrelevant detail.

[chillacy]

I looked into syndication and commercial real estate earlier this year. My primary motivation was to diversify my holdings.

I ultimately bought a house where I could rent rooms out on airbnb or to renters instead of going with a syndication. The main factor was getting leverage: a 30 year mortgage at 2.8% APY is basically free money.

Airbnb is not passive, but I look at it this way: I'm going to live in a house anyways, I might as well get into the business of living.

[reasonabl_human]

This is what a lot of folks are missing- real estate investment returns aren’t necessarily higher than other vehicles but the leverage is awesome.

[dangus]

The leverage makes a lot of sense.

I do assume you can’t just take out a loan to join a syndication, but lots of people rent duplex units and vacation homes as you describe. Thanks for the answer!

[HockeyPlayer]

You are correct that an ETF can provide similar exposure with much better liquidity (ease of getting in and out).

A few possible reasons to go private: a) smaller and more entrepreneurial operators can produce better returns b) capturing the illiquidity premium.