Clients have been renting for five years and are wondering if they should have bought. Or they're about to sign a lease and wondering if buying makes more sense. You need the 5-year comparison before the conversation goes in circles.
Renting costs: Rent paid over 5 years, renters insurance
Opportunity cost: Return you could have earned investing your deposit instead
1 What this calculator does
Compares the true cost of buying vs renting over a 5-year period. Buying costs include mortgage repayments, rates, insurance, maintenance and acquisition costs, offset by capital growth. Renting costs include rent plus the opportunity cost of the deposit invested elsewhere.
2 Formula & professional reasoning
Buy cost (5yr) = Total mortgage repayments + Rates and insurance + Maintenance - Capital gain
Rent cost (5yr) = Annual rent x 5 + Deposit opportunity cost
Deposit opportunity cost = Deposit x [(1 + invest rate)^5 - 1]
Property value year 5 = Price x (1 + growth rate)^5
The rent vs buy decision requires comparing like-with-like over the same time horizon. The buy side includes the total mortgage outflow minus capital gain accrued. The rent side includes total rent paid plus the opportunity cost of the deposit -- what the deposit would have grown to if invested in the sharemarket instead. The critical inputs are property growth rate and investment return rate -- small changes in these assumptions drive large differences in the outcome.
3 Worked examples
⚠️ Illustrative example only — not clinical or professional instruction.
Loan: $600,000 | Monthly repayment at 6.5%: $3,792 | 5yr mortgage total: $227,520 | Rates/insurance/maintenance est: $7,500/yr x 5 = $37,500 | Property value yr 5: $750K x 1.05^5 = $957,211 | Capital gain: $207,211 | Buy net cost: $227,520 + $37,500 - $207,211 = $57,809 | Rent total: $550 x 52 x 5 = $143,000 | Deposit opportunity cost: $150K x (1.07^5-1) = $61,038 | Rent total net: $204,038Buy net cost including lower capital gain: approximately $118,000 | Rent total: $480 x 52 x 5 = $124,800 | Opportunity cost: $130K x (1.08^5-1) = $61,065 | Rent net: $185,865Scenario A buy advantage: property growth dominates -- buying wins comfortably | Scenario B: high investment return + low property growth -- renting may be equal or better4 Sanity check
5 Common errors
| Error | Cause | Consequence | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Using a short time horizon | Comparing rent vs buy over 1-2 years | Transaction costs dominate -- buying almost always looks worse on short horizons | The rent vs buy comparison needs at least 5 years to be meaningful. Stamp duty alone takes 3-4 years to recover through capital growth. |
| Not including opportunity cost of the deposit | Treating the deposit as money that 'just sits there' | Renting looks more expensive than it really is -- because the opportunity cost of the deposit is ignored | The deposit could be invested. Its growth over the comparison period is the opportunity cost of buying. Include it in the analysis. |
| Using optimistic growth assumptions without sensitivity testing | Applying the long-run average growth to a short-term scenario | Buy advantage appears large when it may be marginal or negative | Run the comparison at pessimistic (3%), base (5%) and optimistic (7%) growth rates. The range of outcomes is more informative than a single forecast. |
| Treating the mortgage principal repayment as a pure cost | Focusing on the repayment amount without separating principal from interest | Buying appears more expensive -- but part of each repayment is building equity | The calculator nets capital growth against mortgage costs. Principal repayment is not a cost -- it is equity accumulation. Only interest is a true cost. |
6 Reference & regulatory links
7 Professional workflow
Common tools used alongside this one: