How much of a portfolio can sit in something that pays nothing for ten years
Take 19 acres at $84k. Taxes plus a once-a-year mowing contract run about $1,400, which most buyers looking at that parcel can absorb without noticing. The uncomfortable part is when the purchase is 31% of investable money and none of it comes back until somebody else decides growth reached the parcel. There seem to be two positions in this room. The first is that raw land is a small sleeve, 5 to 10 percent, because you cannot rebalance out of it in a week and a decade with no cash flow destroys your flexibility right when you might want it. The second is that a 5 percent position in an appreciation-only asset is close to pointless, since the entire return is one number moving, so a thin slice of it will not change anything, and anyone who genuinely believes the growth thesis should size the position like they believe it. It is hard to tell which of those is discipline and which is a story. A salary that covers the carry at either size deserves suspicion, because affordability of the carry keeps getting read as permission to concentrate, and those are two different things. What number do the people here who are actually holding land use, and is it a percentage of net worth or something else entirely?
Share of investable net worth you'd put in raw land held 10+ years
15 votes