Property vs. Shares. Which is the Better Investment?

Transcription

1 Property vs. Shares Which is the Better Investment?

2 Table of Contents Important Notice... 2 How the Housing Market Became a Trading Floor... 3 Comparing Houses, Units and Shares... 4 Assets Considered... 4 Case 1: No Leverage... 5 Case 2: 50% Leverage on Both Shares and Houses... 7 Case 3: Houses vs. Shares in the Current Economic Climate... 9 Conclusion Important Notice The authors of this report are investors in all asset classes but their investment portfolios are predominantly weighted in favour of residential property. The authors are not advocating any particular mix of portfolio investments. The report is simply a summary of the findings that have been found by the authors following an analysis of historical data for the relevant asset classes discussed in this report. Neither author is in the business of selling any particular asset class. Neither the authors nor any person or corporate entity in the Onthehouse Group of Companies, nor any of their employees (The Group), gives any warranty with respect to the information contained in this report. The Group believes the statements, recommendations, calculations, data and graphs contained herein to be correct and not misleading but we give no warranty in relation thereto, and we expressly disclaim any liability for any loss or damage which may arise from any person acting or deciding not to act partly or wholly on the basis of any such statements, recommendations, calculations, data or graphs. All information contained in this report is subject to normal copyright laws in favour of The Group. No information contained in this report can be copied or used for any purpose without the consent of a representative of The Group. Photostat copying of any part of this report without the consent of The Group is specifically prohibited Page 2

3 How the Housing Market Became a Trading Floor Over the past few years, the Sydney housing market experienced high levels of demand from investors, both at home and abroad. As a result, the median house in Sydney grew 16.78% in 2014, and the median house is now worth $900,500. Excessive demand for property in Sydney has driven up prices so significantly that it has locked many owner-occupiers out of the market. The Sydney property market is now only affordable to wealthy investors. As a result, the housing market has changed dramatically people are no longer shopping for a long term family home to live in. Instead, investors are looking for high yield investments that are suitable for tenants. The problem now is, as investors crowd out the housing market, growth rates will reflect this. Graph 1 shows the historical growth of properties in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane over the last 20 years. Note that from the year 2000, the peaks and troughs of growth cycles appear more volatile and are producing lower returns. G1: Historical Growth Sydney Melbourne Brisbane - Jun-92 Jun-93 Jun-94 Jun-95 Jun-96 Jun-97 Jun-98 Jun-99 Jun-00 Jun-01 Jun-02 Jun-03 Jun-04 Jun-05 Jun-06 Jun-07 Jun-08 Jun-09 Jun-10 Jun-11 Jun-12 Jun-13 Jun-14 As the housing market presents more risk and volatility, it prompted the question Are houses and units still the best investment to get a high return at a low risk? 2015 Page 3

4 Comparing Houses, Units and Shares To understand which asset provides the best outcome for investors, Residex developed a computer model that would compare dwellings and shares based on two things: 1. This refers to the real amount of money that could be earned on an asset, expressed as a percentage of the asset cost, and takes into account inflation, purchase costs and tax. 2. This refers to the probability that an asset will provide a return higher than inflation, and also represents the level of volatility of the asset. Assets Considered Houses and Units in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane Being land and dwelling assets in these cities. The performance is identified from a total rate of return being the aggregate of both capital growth and rental yield, as calculated by Residex. These three cities indicate the general ranking of dwellings in relation to the other asset classes. Shares The published index for the S, together with the dividend information relevant to that index 1. Short Term Cash The 90 Day Bank Bill rates as published by the Reserve Bank of Australia. 10 Year Commonwealth Government Bonds The rate as published by the Reserve Bank of Australia. Performance of investments were considered as if they had been bought in any quarter over the last 20 years, and the result of all possible holding periods are assessed. Using historical data, Residex set up three circumstances under which to compare houses and shares. In each case, the thing that changed was the amount that could be borrowed to fund the investment. When investing in either houses, units or shares, people often take out loans to fund the investment. Shares have historically been considered most risky, thus institutions have required more money upfront to support these investments. Therefore, you can generally borrow up to 50% on shares. For property, the current climate is seeing loans of around 80%. However, as houses become more risky, these leverage conditions may be changed. Residex analyses how dwellings and shares compare under no borrowing in Case 1, tightened borrowing in Case 2 and two assets are compared at current leverage conditions in Case 3. 1 We also assume that all dividends are fully franked Page 4

5 Case 1: No Leverage In this first test, dwellings and shares were compared under the condition of no borrowings at all as if you were buying a house or shares outright. Graphs 1.1 and 1.2 demonstrate how houses and units compare with the S and Government Bonds in this case. The vertical axis shows the amount of return achieved over the specified number of quarters along the horizontal axis. G1.1: Houses Real G1.2: Units Real - - No of Quarters Hels - - No of Quarters Held - Sydney Houses Brisbane Houses Melbourne Houses ALLOrds 10 Year Bonds 90 Day Dills - Sydney Units Brisbane Units Melbourne Units ALLOrds 10 Year Bonds 90 Bank Bills As can be seen, after the first few years of owning these various assets outright, the S have significant short term returns that are higher than houses and units, and then they diminish over time. After about 6 years, the returns of the S become relatively stable. Dwellings generate poor returns in the first few years. This is because of high establishment costs, such as conveyancing duties. In the long term, between 5 and 7 years of holding these assets, dwellings typically outperform the S as the initial costs of the asset become written off. 90 Day Bank Bills and 10 Year Government Bonds produced positive real returns but did not produce a real return that was as high as that achieved by the other asset sectors for any investment term. In Graph 1.3 and Graph 1.4 the return over two years is presented, together with its risk. Graph 1.3 shows the likelihood of high variability, while Graph 1.4 shows the likelihood of low returns. These graphs indicate that although the S present potentially high, short term returns, these returns are more volatile than dwellings. G1.3: Variability Graph - 2 Years ( = Variability of ) G1.4: Probability Graph - 2 Years ( = Probability of Less Than CPI) 90BB 10YB 90BB 10YB This 2 year analysis indicates that the S are better for anyone who wants a relatively short term investment. Government taxes on property purchases are too significant to achieve high returns during this 2 year period. Coupled with the level of risk, it is clear that shares are better investments in the short term. However, as seen in Graph 1.1 and 1.2, dwellings start to do better after about 4 years. In fact, by the time dwelling assets have been held for 9 years or more, they have minimal risk of producing returns of less than CPI. After 15 years of owning these assets outright, as demonstrated in Graph 1.5 and 1.6, houses and units present the best return at the lowest level of volatility Page 5

6 G1.5: 15 Year Investment Term Graph - 15 Years ( = Variability of ) G1.6: 15 Year Investment Term Graph - 15 Years ( = Probability of Less Than CPI) 10YB 10YB 90BB 90BB 0.50% 1.50% 2.50% 3.50% 0.05% 0.10% 0.15% 0.20% 0.25% 0.30% 0.35% 0.40% 0.45% Case 1 shows, on a no leverage basis, houses and units should be held for long time periods and are not trading assets. Where investments are made for short periods of time, their returns are poor and carry considerable risk. As the investment period increases, dwelling investments improve more quickly than other assets in risk and yield terms, and are the lowest risk asset with the best rates of real return Page 6

7 Case 2: 50% Leverage on Both Shares and Houses Of course, owning dwelling assets outright is something very few people can afford to do. In Cases 2 and 3, risk and return on dwellings and shares where investors must borrow to purchase the asset are compared. This case shows the risk and return on assets where they are leveraged equally, at a rate of 50% of the asset s cost. This is an important case to analyse because excessive spending and volatility in the housing market may cause the government to tighten lending for housing. In Graph 2.1 and 2.2, the real, after tax returns can be seen for houses and units compared to shares. G2.1: Houses 1 1 G2.2: Units 1 1 Real - Real No of Quarters Hels - - No of Quarters Held -1 Sydney Houses Brisbane Houses Melbourne Houses ALLOrds 10 Year Bonds 90 Day Dills -1 Sydney Units Brisbane Units Melbourne Units ALLOrds 10 Year Bonds 90 Bank Bills All asset sectors increase by approximately 1% with leveraging. However, houses and units suffer lower returns in the short term. Leveraging results in the need to hold dwelling assets for a longer period of time to allow for upfront costs of buying property to be paid off. After 2 years, houses begin to deliver positive real returns. However, as seen in Graph 2.3 and 2.4, leveraging comes with increased risk. For the 7 year holding period in Graph 2.3, Melbourne dwellings (houses and units) are the only dwelling group that produce better returns than the S. Graph 2.4 shows the risk of the asset sectors being able to achieve a return which is equal to, or better than, CPI. G2.3: 7 Year Variability Graph - 7 Years ( = Variability of ) 9.00% G2.4: Probability Graph - 7 Years ( = Probability of Less Than CPI) 9.00% No Debt No Debt This analysis shows that when investments are held for 7 years or less, assets will carry a higher level of risk than the S when borrowings are up to 50%. For Brisbane in particular, there is a high risk of low returns. Residex calculates that for dwellings to have safer returns than the S, leveraging should not exceed 45%. The risk associated with 45% leveraging has been demonstrated in Graphs 2.5 and Page 7

8 G2.5: Variability G2.6: Probability Graph - 7 Years ( = Variability of ) Graph - 7 Years ( = Probability of Less Than CPI) No Debt No Debt If properties cannot be borrowed at 45% of the cost, holding periods of longer than 7 years would allow a safer investment at higher leveraging Page 8

9 Case 3: Houses vs. Shares in the Current Economic Climate This final case reflects current borrowing rates for houses and shares. If person A buys an investment property leveraged at 80%, and person B buys a bundle of shares leveraged at 50%, who would come out with the better return? The results are compared in graphs 3.1 and 3.2. G3.1: Houses G3.2: Units Real - -1 Real No of Quarters Hels -2 No of Quarters Held -3 Sydney Houses Brisbane Houses Melbourne Houses ALLOrds 10 Year Bonds 90 Day Dills -3 Sydney Units Brisbane Units Melbourne Units ALLOrds 10 Year Bonds 90 Bank Bills At maximum leverage, returns from investments in dwellings are significantly better than the S but only in the long term. As in the other cases, dwelling investments need to be held for some time. In this case, dwellings must be held approximately 4 to 5 years to allow the after tax return to be positive, as opposed to approximately 2 years in Case 1 and Case 2. Sydney houses produce a very stable real return when held for longer than 7 years. While Sydney has historically been the worst performer in the housing sector, it will provide significantly better returns in the long run. Our results have demonstrated an average return for different asset types. Graph 3.3 represents the real return that the median house achieves, as well as the real return achieved by a house at the 75 th percentile which represents a chance of higher returns from a house, and the 25 th percentile which represents the chance of lower returns. G3.3: Range of s Sydney Houses 3 Real (% pa) vs Quarters Held 2 1 Real n (%pa) Quarters Held 25% 50% 75% This graph demonstrates the volatility and poor returns experienced when purchasing a house at 80% leverage. However, you will notice how the lines on the graph begin to converge after 28 quarters (7 years). Only after 7 years can we be confident that we will get strong, stable returns for houses in Sydney Page 9

10 From the above analysis it is clear that houses and units hold higher returns than shares in the long term. However, for a 7 year holding, our model shows that all dwelling assets have a higher risk of performing poorly. Only Melbourne dwellings show very low risk at a high return compared to shares. This can be seen in graphs 3.4 and 3.5. G3.4: Variability G3.5: Probability Graph - 7 Years ( = Variability of ) Graph - 7 Years ( = Probability of Less Than CPI) No Debt No Debt Conclusion These cases demonstrate that houses and units continue to be the best investment, but only in the long term. The length at which houses and units must be held to outperform shares remains dependent on the amount of money borrowed to fund these investments Page 10