Always interesting to read property Vs shares threads as I generally find property people tend to ignore that leverage is available in shares and that with a little extra thought much higher returns are available. Shares people too, tend to look at property returns without leverage.
A very basic example: if both had 200k, the property person might buy $1,000,000 property, gets 10% for an increase of $100,000.
The shares person could use margin and with 40%-70% leverage. We’ll call it 50%, so we are now trading with 400k to trade with. The trader is typically more aggressive than buy and hold so 30% are than obtainable for the competent trader, for a profit of $120,000.
Ok so I bend the %s, but I think 30% is fair for a trader. The main difference for me is that the $100,000 made from property is tax free, where as the share trader will have to pay tax as well as the fact that property is more of a buy and forget. The trader needs to keep on top of the game at all times.
But for those not convinced with my bending the %s we’ll try the aggressive leverage with equal % returns.
200k buys 2mill property X 10% = 200k profit.
200k buys 57 SPI contracts (this is a leverage tool that basically follows the S&P 200). The 57 SPI contracts effectively gives control of roughly $4mill X 10% = 400k profit.
This doesn’t include the trader actually trading and ignores the fact the trader could go short. But if the trader actually traded it would only be fair to compare with perhaps a property developer.
Personally it isn’t property Vs shares for me its property and shares. Shares are my job, they require more of my attention, the job of my share trading is to fuel my property investments. The tax on shares is offset by any negatively geared properties I hold. Both have strengths and weaknesses, but both can compliment each other in my opinion.
GB
. 
