BUYING a home is more cost-effective than renting in Glasgow, research from a property website suggests.
Zoopla compared the average monthly rents being asked for a two-bedroom home across 50 cities with the cost of paying a mortgage on a similar-sized property with a 10 per cent deposit - the size of deposit often put down by first-time buyers.
Home owners in Glasgow fare particularly well compared with renters there, the research suggests.
Mortgage payers in Glasgow may find themselves parting with an average of £450 per month, while renters there fork out an average of £596 - a difference of £146.
Owning a home in Birmingham and Bradford rather than renting one was also found to be particularly cost-effective.
But in southern England, where house prices can be particularly high, renting often works out cheaper.
London was found to be the city where renting was particularly likely to beat buying, in terms of the monthly costs, followed by Cambridge and Bournemouth.
In London, renting can work out £1,118 cheaper per month than having a mortgage, while in Cambridge the cost difference per month can work out at £549.
The research assumed that a mortgage holder would be on a 25-year repayment deal with a fixed interest rate of 4.5% to make the findings.
Zoopla also analysed the current asking prices and rents of two-bedroom properties currently on the market across Britain's 50 biggest cities for the research.
Lawrence Hall, a spokesman for Zoopla, said: "Buying a property is a costly process, but once you get past the initial fees, it can - as our data shows - prove a more economical option on a monthly basis.
"Although large parts of Britain remain unaffordable for those looking to take their first steps on to or another step up the property ladder, these latest figures tell an encouraging story.
"Whereas back in April it was cheaper to service a monthly mortgage than pay a rental fee in just under half of Britain's biggest cities, buyers are now offered better value in nearly two-thirds of these locations."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel