Hey all, I did some analysis of commercial versus residential property, and was surprised by the results. I used a purchase price of $500,000, the same yield, and assumed the outgoings (based on my knowledge) to create net rent figures each year for them. What I found was that the outgoings (including repairs) saved for commercial was negligible to overall performance (total rent earned) versus residential. I linked the residential's rent into the property price=every 3 years there was a rent increase which correlated to x% yield of the current property's price (from my research yields take a long time to change hence why I linked to the price). I tried different realistic residential property growth rates from 6% p.a. to higher Really the only way I could see commercial being worth it was if its yield was vastly different to that of the residential property. But I feel like I am now talking 7% or higher yields on the commercial side to make it worth it as you can get 6% yields in Hobart or Darwin, and with apartments (along with better than commercial capital growth I may add). I can understand when we start to get into commercial properties worth over say $1 million and a bit, that other factors come into play (finding a residential property that has a 5% yield in this bracket becomes much harder), but for the sub $1 million bracket=are you guys typically only buying commercial buildings of 7% or more yields? I can't see the point when I could buy residential of similar yield and use the better equity generation for more investments too.