Real numbers. Real examples. No BS. We ran the math on both strategies using the same $750K property in Austin—here's what we found.
We're not here to tell you coliving is perfect for everyone. It's not. But if you're an investor choosing between traditional single-family rentals and coliving, you deserve honest data—not marketing fluff.
The truth? Coliving generates 35-56% more revenue per square foot than traditional rentals in the same property. That's not hype—that's math. But it comes with tradeoffs.
Below, we break down BOTH strategies using the same $750K property in Austin, TX—so you can see exactly which model works for YOUR goals. No BS. Just numbers.
The biggest myth: "Coliving is just glorified roommates." Wrong. Professional coliving properties operate like micro-hotels—individual leases, professional management, all-inclusive rent. Traditional rentals lease to ONE family. Coliving leases to 6-12 individuals. Same house, completely different business model.
We took a $750,000, 6-bedroom house in Austin and ran the numbers for both models. Here's what happens:
| Metric |
Traditional Rental
|
Coliving
|
Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Purchase Price | $750,000 | $750,000 | Tie |
| Monthly Rent Income | $4,800 | $6,900 | Coliving |
| Annual Revenue | $57,600 | $82,800 | +44% |
| Monthly Expenses | $3,959 | $5,144 | Traditional |
| 💰 Monthly Cash Flow | $841 | $1,756 | +109% |
| 💵 Annual Cash Flow | $10,092 | $21,072 | +109% |
| Cap Rate | 6.8% | 9.4% | Coliving |
| Avg Occupancy Rate | 92% | 96% | Coliving |
| Vacancy Impact | 100% loss | ~15% loss | Coliving |
| Management Complexity | Low (1 tenant) | Higher (6 tenants) | Traditional |
| Upfront Furnishing | $0 (unfurnished) | $25,000-$40,000 | Traditional |
Coliving generates $10,980 more cash flow per year ($21,072 vs $10,092) from the exact same property. That's 109% more money in your pocket annually.
But here's the catch: you'll manage 6 individual tenants instead of 1 family, spend $30K on furnishings upfront, and deal with higher turnover. Is it worth it? For most investors in high-cost metros: absolutely. For passive investors who hate tenant calls? Maybe not.
We're not here to sell you on coliving. We're here to help you make the right decision for YOUR situation.
Stop guessing. Here's our decision framework based on 100+ deals:
Our Take: In expensive urban markets (Austin, Miami, Denver+), coliving wins on pure ROI. In mid-tier markets or if you're scaling past 20+ properties, traditional might be better for operational simplicity. There's no universal "best"—it depends on YOUR goals.
We could sit here and tell you coliving is perfect. But that would be BS.
The truth: Coliving generates significantly higher returns (35-56% more revenue, 2-4% better cap rates) but requires more active management. Traditional rentals are simpler but lower-performing.
Our recommendation? If you're investing in expensive metros and want to maximize ROI, go coliving. If you're scaling a massive portfolio or prefer pure passivity, stick with traditional. There's no shame in either choice—just pick the one aligned with YOUR goals.
And hey, if you're still unsure? Talk to us. We'll run the numbers for your specific market and situation. No pressure, no sales pitch. Just real advice from people who've done both.
Whether you choose coliving or traditional, we've got the tools and properties to help you succeed.
No pressure. No BS. Just real people helping real investors.