8.6% vs 10.2%: why the lower return creates more millionaires

The S&P 500 returned 10.2% annually over the past 30 years. Real estate returned roughly 8.6%. On paper, the stock market wins. Yet according to the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances, the median homeowner’s net worth sits at $396,200 while the median renter’s is $10,400. That is a 38-to-1 wealth gap, and it has been widening for three decades.

Something about those raw return numbers is lying to you.

The return gap that does not exist

A landmark study by Jordà, Knoll, Kuvshinov, Schularick, and Taylor, published in The Quarterly Journal of Economics, tracked asset returns across 16 economies from 1870 to 2015. Total returns on residential real estate averaged about 7% per year, nearly identical to equities, but with far less volatility.

Since World War II, equities have outperformed housing on average, but only at the cost of much higher price swings and tighter correlation with recessions. The researchers called housing’s risk-adjusted performance “puzzling.” Yet most people compare the two by looking at unlevered appreciation alone. That comparison misses three mechanisms that quietly tilt the scale.

Mechanism 1: leverage turns a 5% gain into a 25% return

When you buy $400,000 in stock, you need $400,000. When you buy a $400,000 property, you typically need $80,000 down. If both appreciate 5%, your stock portfolio gains $20,000 on $400,000: a 5% return. Your property gains $20,000 on $80,000: a 25% return.

Mortgage leverage lets ordinary people control assets worth five times their capital. No mainstream brokerage offers passive index fund investing with 5:1 leverage at 30-year fixed rates. The risk is real: a 20% drop in property value wipes out your entire down payment. But banks have spent a century designing mortgage products to manage this risk, with fixed rates, amortization schedules, and regulatory protections that do not exist in leveraged stock trading.

Mechanism 2: the mortgage piggy bank

Research by Bernstein and Koudijs in The Quarterly Journal of Economics examined what happens when governments mandate full mortgage amortization. Households forced to pay down principal built significantly more wealth than those with interest-only options.

U.S. households collectively contribute hundreds of billions annually through mortgage payments, comparable in magnitude to total pension contributions. Every payment builds equity whether you feel motivated that month or not. This matters because financial literacy barely predicts actual money behavior. A mortgage converts good intentions into automatic execution, which is why the median homeowner accumulates 38 times more wealth than the median renter: the structure forces consistent saving.

Mechanism 3: a tax code written for property owners

Real estate investors access tax advantages stock investors cannot touch. Mortgage interest on rental properties is deductible. The IRS allows annual depreciation deductions (27.5 years for residential, 39 for commercial), reducing taxable income without any cash expense.

The most powerful tool is the 1031 exchange: sell a property, reinvest in another of equal or greater value, and defer all capital gains taxes indefinitely. Some investors chain 1031 exchanges for decades. When they die, heirs receive a stepped-up cost basis, effectively erasing the tax bill permanently. Stock investors get none of this.

Why the “lower return” asset creates more millionaires

The S&P 500 delivers excellent long-term returns for those who hold through decades of volatility. Most do not. The behavioral mistakes that destroy investment returns are well documented: panic selling, performance chasing, overtrading. These errors cost stock investors 1.5 to 4 percentage points annually.

Real estate sidesteps these failures through illiquidity. You cannot panic-sell a house in 30 seconds. The friction that makes property “less liquid” is precisely what prevents the behavioral errors that erode equity returns.

Combine leverage (5:1 amplification), forced savings (automatic equity building), tax advantages (indefinite deferral), and behavioral protection (structural illiquidity), and the math shifts entirely. A nominal 8.6% return with 5:1 leverage and tax-deferred compounding outperforms a nominal 10.2% that most investors actually capture at 6 to 8% after behavioral drag.

If you are comparing asset classes on headline returns, you are measuring the wrong variable. The question is not which asset performs better in a spreadsheet, but which one performs better when a real human owns it. For most people, the alternative portfolio strategies outperforming the S&P 500 include the most boring one: a house, a mortgage, and decades of showing up.

---

Related Reading:

• Gold hit $5,000 and everyone rushed in: why smart money is quietly walking away
• 76% of investors fear a recession, but the data says they should fear themselves