One of
the earliest scientific dreams was the perpetual motion machine; a theoretically
continuous source of energy with no input ever being required. Perpetual motion is of course physically impossible, although
it is easy to design a near utopian machine, which utilises the earth's
abundances of free resources such as sun, wind and wave energy.
Our
ancestors made particular use of a simple device called the lever. It enabled
almost impossibly large weights to be raised with little effort by using a long
pole with a fulcrum near the heavy end. The
same effect can be achieved with pulleys or gears.
Interestingly,
it is possible to devise a moneymaking machine that can apparently achieve a
greater effect than the effort required and that can also mysteriously double or
triple investment returns. The
concept is called gearing or, for
American readers, leverage, usually
with the "lever" part pronounced to rhyme with "clever".
An
easy example of gearing for buy-to-let properties
Say you had £10,000 to invest. You
buy a £100,000 house using a £90,000 mortgage, so your initial £10,000 is the
deposit. Ignore fees and costs for
the moment.
Assume
the house was let out and the rental income just covered the interest-only
mortgage payments, so the ownership cost was zero - again forget maintenance
costs for the time being.
Finally,
let us say the house was sold for £105,000 a year later, which represented a
property growth rate of 5% pa. After
repaying the £90,000 interest-only mortgage, you are therefore left with £15,000.
Your profit is £5,000, which is the amount left over after the sale less your
original capital investment of £10,000.
Capital
growth enhanced
In summary, you have invested £10,000 and after one year received £15,000 - a
profit of 50%. But the underlying
asset itself, the house, only appreciated by 5%.
You have achieved an actual return on capital of ten times the underlying
asset growth. The IRR (Internal
Rate of Return) of your investment is 50% pa.
Had you bought the house for cash with no mortgage, the IRR would be only
5% pa. This remarkable result
arises as a direct result of gearing. You
have geared up by a multiple of ten to increase a return of 5% to 50%.
Income
yield enhanced
Now let us move one stage further. We
first assumed there was no net income since the rent equalled the mortgage
interest. But say the property was
actually rented out for £7,300 per annum (about £140 per week) - that's a
modest property yield of 7.3% pa and is easily accomplished in many areas of the
UK.
If the
£90,000 mortgage interest rate were 7% pa, the interest payable in the year
would come to £6,300. Income £7,300,
expenditure £6,300: the result is
a net income of £1,000 per annum.
An
income of £1,000 per annum on an initial investment of £10,000 means a running
income yield of 10% per annum. So,
not only have you achieved a capital growth of 50% but there is also an income
of 10% per annum as well - an IRR of 60% in total in year one!
Is
this really true? Surely it is not that easy.
What are the snags? Well,
reality always involves some friction, which also frustrated the perpetual
motion machine from realising perfect success.
But despite some setbacks, the results from gearing can still be
impressive.
The
key to understanding gearing is to base your yield calculations on the actual
capital invested, the deposit if you like, and not on the value of the house.
It is only then that your calculations come to life.
The investment yield is the rental income divided by the capital invested
expressed as a percentage. The
property yield is the rental income divided by the value of the property only.
Friction
reduces returns but does not eliminate them.
In
the first example, we ignored costs and the effect of tax. Taking "friction" (i.e. all the costs) into account
will inevitably bring down the eventual return. Say there is an additional £500 per annum to pay each year
to cover maintenance and the general expenses of running the property.
This brings the running income yield down to £500 pa - from 10% pa to 5%
pa.
The
expenses on the purchase and the sale of the property could well absorb much of
the first year's profit, leaving only say £1,000 surplus out of the gross £5,000.
But even £1,000 is 10% of the £10,000 invested.
After
just one year, adding in the running yield of 5% pa, the IRR is now a more
humble 15% pa gross, less than the dramatic 60% frictionless return from our
first example but still three times bigger than the underlying 5% growth of the
asset, so gearing still multiplies the return.
Tax
Income tax must be paid on any revenue profit, which is your rental income less
any relevant expenditure. Mortgage
interest counts as relevant expenditure so tax is levied only on your £500 pa
profit. Your net income is the
gross income less tax at your marginal tax rate. A top rate 40% taxpayer would
pay £200 tax pa, reducing the net income to £300 pa - a 3% pa net-of-tax
running yield.
Capital
gains tax is also due on the capital profit less acquisition costs and selling
costs. If the gain was just £1,000, capital gains tax at the maximum rate of
40% could whittle this gain down to a net £600, although many taxpayers would
pay less tax, if any at all, if their total gains are lower than the annual
allowance and taper relief is available over time.
With
your net income of £200 and the £600 net capital gain, the eventual outcome
from your £10,000 investment is £900 in total after all tax and expenses -
possibly more if your tax rate is lower. This
is a 9% net-of-everything profit in one year. A 40% taxpayer would be lucky to
get 3.6% pa net of tax from a conventional deposit, so gearing has at least
doubled, and could possibly triple the underlying growth rate. And we have only
considered one year and absorbed all the expenses.
Buying
& selling costs
The
buying costs should strictly come out of the initial investment and the selling
costs from the sale. Realistically, one needs to hold the property for at least
two years to produce a return that exceeds that which could be achieved by
paying cash, to cover the buying and selling expenses. The “Buy-to-let”
spreadsheet included allows you to enter any set of variables.
In particular, it compares the overall return both with and without
gearing (i.e. paying cash) to highlight the advantages of gearing when relevant.
Risk
of loss
Suppose
the property fell in value by 5% instead of increasing in value, producing a £5,000
loss. You will still have costs to
pay as well, so you could lose most of your initial £10,000.
Similarly,
if the mortgage interest increased by more than the rent there could be a
negative running yield - even more negative if the tenant leaves or goes into
arrears. Voids in rental income are
commonplace and must be expected.
So
obviously the downside with gearing of this type is the risk of loss.
As we have identified earlier, higher returns always imply higher risk.
The higher the gearing, the greater the risk of loss but the more
exciting the gain if it all works out. Administration
costs could well turn out to be more than expected.
Minimising
the risk
The
figures in the above example assumed a sale after just a year to keep the
figures simple. In practise one
would want to hold the property for a bit longer and in particular resist
selling if the market is depressed. As
we have seen earlier, property prices can fluctuate, although the general trend
is very likely to be upwards.
Mortgage
interest can fluctuate but fixed interest deals are available as we have seen
and are particularly appropriate for the nervous investor.
A
smaller mortgage can reduce the risk as it increases the running income although
it reduces the yield since you have to put down more capital.
The ratio of the mortgage loan divided by the property value is known as
the LTV (loan-to-value percentage). The
last example assumed a high LTV of 90%. The
higher the LTV, the higher the running yield and the greater the potential
capital return, but the higher the risk of both losing the capital and suffering
a negative income over time.
|
Mortgage |
Initial |
Gross |
Yield
% pa |
|
£50,000
(50%) |
£50,000 |
£3,800 |
7.6% |
|
£70,000
(70%) |
£30,000 |
£2,400 |
8.0% |
|
£90,000
(90%) |
£10,000 |
£1,000 |
10.0% |
Individual
investors can therefore address their own perception of the balance between risk
and reward by choosing the most appropriate LTV.
In most cases it is down to what deposit is available.
An ideal balance of risk against reward might be an LTV of between 70%
and 80% and most lenders would not lend more than 80% anyway as they like to see
the rental income covering the mortgage interest by a comfortable margin.
But ultimately it is down to individuals, their cash situation and their
attitude to risk.
The
property yield will also affect the choice of LTV. In some areas property can be
rented for yields of well over 10%. The
best yields often come from the smaller, cheaper properties costing well under
£100,000 and not situated in up-market areas.
But higher yielding properties often grow by less and visa versa.
The careful investor who chooses well could achieve a geared return well
into double figures and 20% pa is quite possible.
Safety
in numbers
For
the serious, professional investor, it can be worthwhile buying a portfolio
of properties. There is always an advantage in the economy of scale, since
expenses can be distributed and the risk is spread. There is less likelihood of a void (ie no tenant) being so
serious when you have a few other performing properties to bolster the income.
If you
had £100,000 available to invest, you could buy one property for £100,000 for
cash and enjoy a good rental income with low risk but a modest capital gain.
Or you could buy ten similar properties with high gearing and achieve two
or three times the return and with a higher running income than if you paid
cash. But the risk, albeit on the higher side, is significantly lessened with
the "safety in numbers" strategy.
A
successful example of buy-to-let
A
colleague of mine manages a portfolio of 35 flats in the West Country
distributed over seven separate properties with five or six flats in each. Each flat fetches from £70 to £90 per week producing around
£100,000 per annum gross income, allowing for 10% voids - so 3 or 4 flats may
be unoccupied at any point in time. He
is using some surplus income to refurbish some of the flats in order to improve
chance of earning a higher future rent.
He
invested initially about £200,000 and borrowed £500,000 from the Nationwide
Building Society to buy the £700,000 portfolio, which initially yielded around
15% pa running income, based on the property values alone. The average LTV was
just over 70%.
After
mortgage interest, maintenance, refurbishment and management costs, he enjoys
around £40,000 per annum income before tax, which represents 20% pa running
yield on the £200,000 investment. The
portfolio now, about 15 months later, is probably worth at least £800,000,
which represents a capital profit, when sold, of £100,000 on an investment of
just £200,000 - 50% in 15 months. Not
bad!
Clearly
he bought well and at a good time and luckily had a decent chunk of capital to
start with. But it demonstrates the
sort of exciting returns that are possible, in spite of "friction".
Commercial
property
Many
would-be landlords baulk at the prospect of finding and managing even one tenant
let alone several dozen. There are
many Agencies who will, for a fee, take on the burden for you. But for the
investor with a sizable deposit of more than £100,000 and who wants to minimise
the hassle, there is another alternative - the commercial property.
I am
talking about offices, warehouses or even factories, let on a commercial tenancy
basis. The concept of gearing
described for buy-to-let residential properties is still equally valid.
The difference is that commercial rents are usually for a longer period
(5 to 10 years or more as opposed to a 6 month shortholds) and the tenant is
usually responsible for repairs and insurance.
Moreover, a good quality commercial tenant is far less likely to default
and the rent usually rolls in every quarter with little aggravation.
Quality
covenants
Like
residential tenants, the quality of the tenant, in terms of their likelihood of
paying the rent regularly, is critical. In
commercial terms, it is referred to as the "strength of the covenant".
A good quality covenant may mean a blue chip public listed company like a
bank or an insurance company, or a well known high street store like Boots or
Woolworths, or one of the numerous government bodies.
They are very unlikely to default and they also like the comfort of a
long term contract.
The
downside is that the property yield for such good quality tenants may be lower
than that for the less illustrious occupant.
Nevertheless it is possible to obtain property yields of 8% to 9% pa from
first class covenants that provides a solid income stream.
There
are many lenders willing to provide loans for commercial property.
They will base their offer of mortgage primarily on the tenant's ability
to pay the rent rather than just the landlord.
Moreover, the better the tenant, and the longer the tenancy term, the
lower the interest rate you can negotiate.
There is no ‘standard’ rate: some commercial lenders set a fixed
margin over a defined independent base rate such as LIBOR.
Payments are usually collected quarterly to match the rents, which are
also normally paid quarterly. So
although you might receive a lower rent with a higher quality tenant, you may
pay a lower interest rate and management costs are lower.
The gearing advantage therefore remains intact but the better the tenant
the lower the risk element. In
short, it makes sense to seek out the best possible tenants.
Syndicated
purchases
Unfortunately,
prime tenants normally like to inhabit expensive property.
If you like this sort of investment property, you may have to join a
syndicate of like-minded investors if your cash is insufficient to provide the
deposit for a single property investment. There
are a few specialist companies who deal in syndicated commercial property
transactions, some even organising the mortgage on behalf of the syndicate.
It is
also possible to build your own commercial investment by developing a commercial
unit in a particularly desirable location, sometimes pre-let to a good tenant.
Again, specialist syndicates are available and you are now very much in
the professional sector.