[comfypotato]

Typically, you can save money by buying the exact same situation that you would rent. Whether or not that exact situation is available to purchase, or if you would even want to own it (owning a small studio might not make sense) is a different question.

Unless I’m wrong and SF is actually cheaper to rent always.

Even considering all this, it’s often only a small difference. And renting gives you a different and sometimes advantageous quality of life.

[refurb]

I've run the numbers for SF and even before interest rates went up, the per month carry costs of owning (mortgage, insurance, property taxes, maintenance, etc) are 50-100% higher than renting.

If you include historic price appreciation over certain periods, you can end up ahead owning, but nothing guarantees that same price appreciation going forward.

[jaredlt]

How does the buy-to-rent market work with those numbers?

[refurb]

It depends.

For non-rent control places new landlords subsidize the cost. It's happening a lot in Toronto right now. Tons of new condos that investors bought where the rent doesn't cover the monthly carrying costs. They are betting that price appreciation will make them whole (and more). That's a risky bet.

For rent controlled apartments, you basically pay based on what the tenant's rent is. So if you have someone paying 50% of market rate, that dramatically bring the value of the house down. I was renting in a 3 unit building that would be worth $6M empty, but with 3 tenants paying below-market rates, it was sold for about $2M.

[packagethieves]

It mostly doesn’t from what I saw in SF (for single family homes anyway). One issue: Prop 13 means it’s hard to compete as a new purchaser vs. someone that purchased many years ago. For instance, my neighbor rented her ground floor out. Because she had lived there for 40+ years her property taxes were ~$1000/year. Recently sold houses in that area had property taxes of 15-20 times that amount.