Yield vs growth: why one score can't serve two property strategies in 2026

What a yield strategy actually optimises for

A yield investor asks a narrow question: after every cost is paid, does the rent leave anything behind? Gross rent is the starting figure, not the answer. Property management, vacancy, maintenance, land tax and loan interest all come out before the income means anything.

Plintha's defaults make that drain explicit — property management at 8% of rent, a vacancy allowance of 3% of rent, maintenance at 0.7% of the purchase price per year — and every one of them can be overridden in Advanced if your numbers differ. Under the Yield lens, a property is judged the way you would judge a small business: on whether it pays its own way.

What a growth strategy optimises for

A growth investor accepts weaker income today in exchange for the eventual capital gain, and that trade has historically leaned on two tax supports: deducting rental losses against salary during the hold, and concessional CGT treatment at the sale. Both changed in the 2026–27 Budget.

For properties purchased or contracted from 12 May 2026, rental losses are deductible against other income only for new builds. An established property bought after that date has its losses quarantined — carried forward against future rental profits or the eventual capital gain, not your salary. And from 1 July 2027, the flat 50% CGT discount is replaced by indexation-based treatment with an effective minimum of 30%, with new builds retaining concessional treatment. Properties owned or contracted before 12 May 2026 are grandfathered under the old rules for both.

The practical upshot: the growth case now depends on the property's class — grandfathered, new build, or established post-budget — as much as on the property itself. Plintha classifies every property into one of these three classes and changes the tax modelling accordingly.

Why the same property scores differently under each lens

The two lenses put different questions to the same figures. Yield asks whether the income covers the costs now. Growth asks whether the position can be held long enough to reach the sale — which is a survival question, not an income question.

That is why every Plintha analysis includes a stress test: interest rates 2% higher, an extended vacancy, and the interest-only period expiring into principal-and-interest repayments. A property can pass the yield test comfortably and still look fragile under the growth lens once the hold is stress-tested, or carry thin income while presenting a defensible long-hold position. Averaging the two produces a middling number that describes neither strategy.

Why Plintha scores both rather than blending them

Every Plintha analysis carries two scores — Yield and Growth — each from 0 to 100 with its own verdict: Meets Criteria, Conditional, or Below Criteria. A blended score would hide the disagreement between the lenses, and the disagreement is usually the most useful thing the analysis has to say. A property that is Below Criteria on yield but Meets Criteria on growth is a fundamentally different proposition from one that is mediocre on both, even if a blended average would rank them identically.

Both scores are built on the same transparent inputs — 80% LVR, 6.5% interest and the other defaults unless you override them — and every figure in the report carries its provenance: computed, [ESTIMATE] with the assumption shown, or [ASSUMED] from a default you can change. The free tier includes one analysis per month, with no card required, so you can see both lenses on a real property before deciding whether the tool earns a place in your process.

Common questions