I totally get what you mean about the “babysitting” part. I’ve always leaned toward fixed rates myself, mostly because I’m the type who likes to know exactly what’s coming out of my account every month. But I did seriously consider an ARM a few years back when we were house hunting and money was tight. The lower initial payment looked super tempting, especially since we figured we’d probably move again within five years.
My partner was all for it, but I kept thinking about what would happen if our plans changed—like if we ended up staying longer or couldn’t sell as quickly as we hoped. Plus, I’m not the most organized person when it comes to tracking financial stuff (I still have a stack of unopened mail on my kitchen table), so the idea of having to keep tabs on rates and my credit score kind of stressed me out.
One thing that tripped me up was how much lenders look at your credit when it’s time to refinance. We had a medical bill go to collections by mistake, and even though we sorted it out, our scores took a hit for a while. That made me realize how easily things can go sideways, even if you think you’re on top of everything.
But then again, I know people who’ve saved thousands with ARMs because they were really disciplined and had backup savings just in case. It seems like it really comes down to how much risk you’re comfortable with—and maybe how much time and energy you want to spend thinking about your mortgage.
Curious—has anyone here ever regretted *not* going with an ARM? Like, paid more over the years just for peace of mind? Sometimes I wonder if I’m being too cautious and missing out on savings...
I hear you on the peace of mind thing. I’ve paid a bit more over the years sticking with fixed, but honestly, not having to worry about rate jumps or refinancing stress has been worth it for me. Sometimes “too cautious” just means you sleep better at night, you know?
I get where you’re coming from—predictability has its perks, especially when you’re juggling multiple properties or projects. But I’ve noticed some folks are willing to gamble on adjustables for the initial savings, especially if they don’t plan to hold the property long-term. Curious if anyone here has actually benefited from that approach, or if it’s just a risk that rarely pays off in practice? Sometimes I wonder if the stress is worth the potential upside.
Curious if anyone here has actually benefited from that approach, or if it’s just a risk that rarely pays off in practice?
I went adjustable on a condo I only planned to keep for 3 years. The lower rate saved me a chunk, and I sold before the rate adjusted. But honestly, it was a bit nerve-wracking—kept checking rates like a hawk. If you’re sure about your exit timeline, it can work, but if there’s any chance you’ll hold longer... the stress might not be worth it. Peace of mind has value, too.
If you’re sure about your exit timeline, it can work, but if there’s any chance you’ll hold longer... the stress might not be worth it. Peace of mind has value, too.
Totally get that—my buddy tried the same thing, except his “3-year plan” turned into 7 years and a lot of sleepless nights. He joked his hairline adjusted faster than his rate. I’m curious, though—has anyone actually ridden out the adjustment period and come out ahead? Or is it always a mad dash to sell before the clock runs out?
