"Now I'm leaning toward holding onto a bit more cash just in case... feels safer to have some breathing room rather than stretching myself thin chasing lower interest."
Totally get where you're coming from—cash flow is king, especially when surprises pop up. Have you considered running the numbers on a midpoint scenario, like 20% down instead of 25%? Might hit that sweet spot between interest savings and liquidity.
Went through a similar debate myself last year. I initially aimed for the lowest interest possible, but after some surprise repairs (roof leak, anyone?), I was glad I'd kept extra cash handy. Have you factored in potential maintenance or vacancy periods into your numbers yet? Sometimes a slightly higher rate is worth it if it means you're not scrambling when life inevitably throws curveballs your way...
You make a solid point about keeping cash reserves handy, especially for those unexpected expenses. However, I'd argue that the decision isn't always as straightforward as accepting a slightly higher interest rate for liquidity. It really depends on your overall financial picture and investment goals.
For instance, if you're someone who already maintains a healthy emergency fund or has access to other liquid assets, opting for the lowest possible interest rate could significantly enhance your long-term returns. Over a 15- or 20-year period, even a modest difference in interest can compound into substantial savings, potentially outweighing the short-term comfort of extra cash on hand.
Of course, you're right—maintenance and vacancies are inevitable. But rather than accepting higher financing costs upfront, it might be worth exploring alternative strategies, such as setting aside a dedicated maintenance reserve or leveraging a line of credit at lower rates if emergencies arise. It's all about balancing immediate flexibility with long-term profitability...
Interesting perspective, and I see where you're coming from. But I'm curious—wouldn't relying on a line of credit during emergencies potentially expose you to fluctuating interest rates or tighter lending conditions down the road? I've seen investors get caught off guard when banks tighten up unexpectedly. Maybe there's a middle ground between liquidity and lower financing costs that's worth exploring...
Good points—I agree relying solely on credit lines can be risky, especially if the market shifts unexpectedly. I've personally seen colleagues scramble when banks suddenly tighten lending criteria. One possible approach might be maintaining a moderate cash reserve alongside a manageable line of credit. That way, you're not overly exposed to interest rate swings or changing loan conditions, but you still have enough liquidity to handle unforeseen expenses comfortably...just a thought.
