(03) 9020 2905Aww, do we really have to start this argument? That’s like asking: “Which was better, Dynasty or Dallas?” Heather Locklear or Victoria Principal?
The “property versus shares” battle is a war with no end. And I’ve donned khakis for both sides. I originally fell in love with property. Obsessed, actually. So much so, I wrote two books about it. Nowadays, as a financial adviser, I deal with both.
It’s like asking “Do you dig dogs or cats?”
They’re … just … different. They will appeal to different investors for different reasons.
Every property is unique. Property is a huge asset class (a minimum of $350,000), virtually demands gearing, is not very liquid, requires some direct management and has limited options for additional investments.
Company shares are identical. Most shares can be sold at a moment’s notice, can be bought in small chunks (a few hundred dollars), at any time, and the ongoing management of the investment is done by the company’s management.
So, is this a question of what performs better over the long term? Another Dynasty/Dallas question. Share and property proponents can pull stats to show that their asset class is the best performing. I don’t get into that debate.
If you’re comparing shares to property right now, property will obviously win because shares have had a very ordinary few years. But statistics can be tweaked.
Can’t I just love them both? Don’t make me choose!
Bruce Brammall is the author of Debt Man Walking (www.debtman.com.au) and a licensed financial adviser.